Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

visions of the act, his financial burdens might | 7. MASTER AND SERVANT O 8712, New, vol.
be increased.

16 Key-No. Series--WORKMEN'S COMPENSA-
(Ed. Note.-For other cases, see States. Dec. TION ACT-CONSTITUTIONALITY.
Dig. Omw16812.)

Such act is not unconstitutional because

8. STATUTES m114-TITLE OF ACT-CONSTI-

requiring the employé to elect, at the time of his

employment and in advance of any injury,

TUTIONAL PROVISIONS - WORKMEN'S COM-

| whether he will come under its terms, and pro-

PENSATION ACT.

viding that if he voluntarily chooses to come

The Workmen's Compensation Act, entitled

ompensation Act, entied under its terms, he waives any other remedy,

"An act creating the State Industrial Accident

since the act merely proposes to employers and

Commission and providing an industrial acci- employés

employés an accident and life insurance scheme

dent fund,” an appropriation for such fund, pro: in lieu of litigation, which noncompulsory fea-

viding for the administration of the terms of|ture eliminates the objection of its unconstitu-

the act, for the collection and disbursement of tionality

funds for the compensation of workmen, pre-

scribing the duty of employers and workmen 8. STATUTES Om119SALARY OF PUBLIC OF-

subject to the act, providing penalties for a vi-l FICERS-FORM AND CONTENTS OF ACT.

olation of its terms, and abolishing, in certain

Workmen's Compensation Act, creating a

cases, the defenses of assumption of risk, con-

State Industrial Accident Commission composed

tributory negligence, and negligence of fellow of three commissioners, appointed for terms of

servants in actions for personal injury and four years at an annual salary of $3,600, pay-

death, does not violate the constitutional re-able from the accident fund provided by the

quirement that every act embrace but one sub-act, does not violate Const. art. 9, § 7, declaring

ject, which shall be expressed in its title.

that laws making appropriations for the salaries

(Ed. Note. For other cases, see Statutes,

of public officers and current expenses of the.

state shall contain provisions upon no other sub-

Cent, Dig. $$ 145, 147-149; Dec. Dig. Om 114.)

ject, since it is not an appropriation bill in the

4. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Om 80-MASTER AND sense that bills providing for general current

SERVANT 161/2, New, vol. 16 Key-No. Se- expenses or salaries of constitutional officers are
ries-JUDICIAL POWER – ENCROACHMENT BY | such, especially in view of the const

such, especially in view of the construction fol-

LEGISLATURE.

lowed and acquiesced in by the Legislature, and

Such act, creating a State Industrial Acci- of the disorganization of public business and de-
dent Commission, composed of three commis-struction of private pecuniary rights which
sioners charged with the administration of the would follow a declaration of its unconstitution-
act, does not contravene Const. art. 3, § 1, de-ality.
claring that the powers of government shall be sed. Note._For other cases. See Statutes.
divided into three separate departments, the cente. Die 88 164-167: Deva

be Cent. Dig. $8 164-167; Dec. Dig. Ow119.]

legislative, the executive, including the admin-|

istrative, and the judicial, and that no officer | 9. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 48 - CONSTITU-

of any department shall exercise the functions | TIONALITY OF STATUTE-CONSTRUCTION.

of another.

A statute will not be held unconstitutional

JEJ. Note. For other cases. See Constitution where a reasonable doubt exists as to its in-

al Law, Cent. Dig. 88 140, 143–147; Dec. Dig.

validity.

80.)

[Ed. Note. For other cases, see Constitution-

al Law, Cent. Dig. $ 46; Dec. Dig. 48;

5. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 80-MASTER AND Statutes, Cent. Dig. $ 56.)

SERVANT 1612, New, vol. 16 Key-No. Se

ries-JUDICIAL POWERS - CONSTITUTIONAL 10. ŞTATUTES O15--AMENDMENT - READING

PROVISIONS-INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARD.

-CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS.

Under Const. art. 7, § 1, as amended in

Const. art. 4, § 19, requiring bills to be

1911, the Legislature was authorized to con-

read by sections on three several days in each

fer judicial powers upon the State Industrial

Induction house does not require the whole of a bill, as

Accident Commission created by, Workmen's

amended during its progress through the Legis-

Compensation Law, since under the amendment

lature, to be so read.

the Legislature or the people may confer judicial

[Ed. Note. For other cases, see Statutes,
powers upon any tribunal selected, so long as Cent. Dig. 88 12, 13; Dec. Dig. Ew15.]
the different departments of government are not Burnett, J., dissenting in part.
made to encroach on each other.

[Ed. Note. For other cases, see Constitution. In Banc. Appeal from Circuit Court, Mar-

al Law, Cent. Dig. 8$ 140, 143-147; Dec. Dig. ion County; William Galloway, Judge.

80.]

Suit in equity by George Evanhoff against

6. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 313, 328—RIGHT the State Industrial Accident Commission

TO JUSTICE-DUE PROCESS OF LAW--WORK-|
MEN'S COMPENSATION ACT-TRIAL BY JURY.

and others, to enjoin the enforcement of the
Workmen's Compensation Act, providing a Workmen's Compensation Act. Decree for
system of actual voluntary insurance for injured defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
workmen and creating a State Industrial Acci-
dent Commission to administer its provisions,

This is a suit in equity to enjoin the en-
does not violate Const. art. 1, § 10, declaring forcement of chapter 112, Laws of 1913, gen-
that no court shall be in secret, but justice shall erally known as the Workmen's Compensa-
be administered openly, and that every man shall I neon
have remedy by due course of law for injury to

|tion Act. In the complaint it is alleged that
his person, etc., nor Const. U. S. Amend.' 14, plaintiff is a subject of the king of Bulgaria,
§ 1, declaring that no one shall be deprived of but is a resident freeholder and taxpayer of
property without due process of law, on the the- the state of Oregon. The complaint then al-
ory that the act attempts to establish a court
for the trial of causes without a jury, and to leges

leges that he has a good cause of action
compel employers and employés to adjust their against the Bridal Veil Lumber Company
grievances without their consent, since the act for damages for personal injuries sustained
leaves both the employer and the employé free by him while in its employ, and sets forth in
to accept or reject its provisions.
(Ed. Note.-For other cases, see Constitution-

detail the facts constituting such cause of
al Law, Cent. Dig. 88 933, 950-963; Dec, Dig.

action with all the particularity which could

313, 328.)

T be required in an action for damages against

said corporation, averring that he has there-, functions in violation of section 1, article 3, of by been damaged in the sum of $15,000. It th

of $15.000. It the Constitution of Oregon. (2) It arbitrarily is further alleged:

fixes a limit on sums to be allowed for personal

injuries, and thereby passes judgment by legis"The State Industrial Accident Commission lative enactment on the amount which any wrongfully professes to have power and author- injured person falling within its purview may ity to deprive plaintiff of his right of action or recover, and is violative of section 1, art. 3, of to a civil trial in the said cause, and wrongfully the Constitution of Oregon in that the Legislaprofesses to have power and authority, and is ture, by fixing such judgments, attempts to and threatening to and will, unless restrained by did exercise judicial powers. (3) It is not withthis court, deprive this plaintiff of his right of in the police powers of the state. (4) It protrial of said cause of action before a jury or vides a system of awards based upon sociological before any of the established circuit courts of reasons, and disregards the individual and perthe state of Oregon, more especially before the sonal right of an injured employé to recover circuit court of the state of Oregon otherwise such injuries, and thereby violates section 10, having jurisdiction thereof, and wrongfully pro- art. 1, and section 17, art. 1, of the Oregon Confesses to have power and autliority to determine stitution. (5) It imposes taxes which are generthe amount which plaintiff shall receive in pay- al throughout the state. Such act has not been ment by reason of said injuries, and to cause ratified by the voters of the state at a general plaintiff to accept from said State Industrial election, as provided in section la, art. 9, of the Accident Commission a sum which it may see Constitution of Oregon as amended by laws of fit to award plaintiff in full and complete dis- 1911, at page 9, and therefore is not in force. charge and satisfaction of all of his claims aris- (6) It violates subdivision 3, § 23, art. 4, in .ing from the matters herein alleged, and that this: Section 32 of the said act attempts to the said State Industrial Accident Commission provide and regulate a special practice in courts bases its claim upon and in virtue of an act, of justice. It further violates subdivision 10 to wit, House Bill No. 27, entitled, 'An act of section 23, art. 4, of the Constitution of the creating the State Industrial Accident Commis- state of Oregon, in that it purports to and sion and providing an industrial accident fund, provides for the assessment and collection of making an appropriation for such fund and taxes for state purposes, and is a special act providing for the administration of the terms on both the subjects herein specified. (7) It of this act, providing for the collection and dis- violates the Constitution of Oregon at section 7 bursement of funds for the benefit, compensa- of article 9, in this: It creates public offices tion and care of workmen, prescribing the duties and makes appropriations for the salaries of of employers and workmen subject to this act, the officers therein designated and other current and providing penalties for a violation of the expenses of the state, and embraces subjects terms of this act, and abolishing in certain cases other than those relating to the salaries of such the defenses of assumption of risk, contributory officers and the current expenses of the state. negligence and the negligence of a fellow serv- In addition to such subjects, it purports to and ant in actions for personal injury and death,' does embrace acts on the following subjects: filed in the othce of the secretary of state of the (a) Creating the State Industrial Accident state of Oregon, February 25, 1913, and acts Commission; (b) providing an industrial acamendatory thereto and thereof. * * * Thos.cident fund; (c) making an appropriation for B. Kay, as state treasurer of the state of Oregon, such fund; (d) providing for the administrawrongfully and without right professes and tion of the terms of the act; (e) providing for claims to be empowered by the said act to pay, the collection and disbursement of funds for the and unless restrained by an order of this court benefit, compensation, and care of workmen ; will pay, to each of the said commissioners con- (f) prescribes the duties of employers and workstituting the State Industrial Accident Com- men subject to the act; (g) provides penalties mission the sum of $3,600 a year each as salary for violations of the terms of the act; (h) abolfor their acts as such, and will make such pay- | ishes certain defenses in certain cases; (i) atments out of a fund purported to be created by tempts to regulate rights where injuries to a laand referred to in said act; and, further, the boring man are caused by third persons; (j) said state treasurer claims and asserts power provides a system of appeals and regulates pracand authority to pay, and unless restrained by | tice thereon. (8) It vests judicial power in the order of this court will pay, out of such funds State Industrial Accident Commission without divers sums of money for all and every of the providing for a jury trial before it, and atvarious purposes set forth in said act, and tempts to make its decisions binding unless apwrongfully and without right asserts power and pealed from, and thereby deprives injured laauthority to pay, and unless restrained by order borers of their right of jury trial in civil cases, of this court, will pay, out of said fund such and is violative of section 17, art. 1, section la, sums of money as the commission above named art. 1, and section 10, art. 3, of the Constitumay see fit to allow to various and numerous tion of Oregon. (9) It provides for the deterinjured workingmen, and by such payment the mination of questions involving the extent of said state treasurer will divert large sums of injuries and the amount to be recovered by inmoney collected as taxes to the payment of the jured workingmen, and vests the determination various sums designated in said act. * Die of such questions in the said Oregon Industrial

"The acts of the defendants State Industrial Accident Commission, and does not require no. Accident Commission and Thos. B. Kay, state tice to be given to the injured workingmen of treasurer of the state of Oregon, in enforcing the time or place of hearing, nor require prothe said legislative enactment known as and cess to procure the attendance of witnesses, nor called the Workmen's Compensation Act of Or- does it require that a time and opportunity be egon, are, and each of them is, wrongful and un- given to such injured workmen to be heard in lawful in this: That the said act (Session Laws respect to their rights, and therein it does not of Oregon 1913, page 188), filed in the office provide due process of law to persons falling of the Secretary of State, February 25, 1913, within its purview, and is violative of section commonly known as and called the Oregon 10, art. 1, of the Constitution of the state of Workmen's Compensation Act, is unconstitu- Oregon. (10) It attempts to compel workmen tional and void and conflicts with the provisions to make an election in advance of injuries receivof the Constitution of the state of Oregon, as ed between the awards under th

r the act and the well as the Constitution of the United States constitutional right to proceed in a civil jury in the following particulars, to wit: (1) It case guaranteed by section 10, art. 1, and secvests judicial powers and functions in an admin-tion 17, art. 1, of the Constitution of Oregon, istrative and executive board, to wit, the Ore- (11) At sections 2 and 3 of the Workmen's Comgon Industrial Accident Commission, and there-pensation Act, it provides for the appointment provide for their election and recall, and the surate with the injuries sustained. (4) It desaid act vests judicial power in said commis- i nies to injured workmen the equal protection of sioners and is violative of section 18, art. 2, of the law, and violates Amendment 14, § 1, of the the Constitution of Oregon. (12) At section 20 Constitution of the United States in this: That of said act, it attempts to make annual appro- within the class of workmen affected by its propriations out of any moneys in the state treas- visions, it awards equal sums for similar injuury not otherwise appropriated, and makes such ries to different workmen, regardless of the appropriations for a period of time extending question of fault, and thereby takes from a beyond the life of the Legislative Assembly workman injured through the fault of his master which passed the act, and thereby violates sec- the sum which he should recover, and gives to a tions 1, 2, and 3, article 9, of the Constitution workman suffering like injuries an equal sum, of Oregon. (13) It violates sections 7, 8 and 9, i although he is hurt through his own fault; alarticle 11, of the Constitution of Oregon in so it denies the equal protection of the laws to this: That at section 20 of the said act an workmen of the same class, grade, and kind who appropriation is made out of any moneys in are working for private persons, corporations, the general fund in the state treasury not other- | firms, or enterprises, and takes from them the wise appropriated, and there is also appropriat- privileges of jury trial and immunity from the ed annually out of any moneys in the state operation of said law which are accorded to latreasury not otherwise appropriated a sum equal borers for the state of Oregon, or any of the to one-seventh of the total sum, which shall be several counties within the state of Oregon, or received by the state treasurer under provisions any municipalities within the state of Oregon, in of section 19 of said act, and by such enact- this: That laborers engaged in like work for the ments the state of Oregon undertakes to and state of Oregon, or any municipality or coundoes assume to pay obligations and losses occa- ty therein, as that in which laborers for private sioned in the private business of persons, cor- corporations, associations, individuals, or enterporations, and associations, and the state at- prises are engaged, are not embraced within its tempts to and does lend its credit to such private terms; that in each particular specified herein enterprises and corporations. (14) That the wherein the said act violates the Constitution of said act is violative of section 20, art. 4, of the the United States, it infringes upon the right Constitution of Oregon in this: It embraces of this plaintiff to recover for the injuries heresubjects not expressed in the title and not ger- inbefore set forth." mane thereto. At section 12 it attempts to reg.

The plaintiff declares that the act under ulate rights of an injured workman injured by a third person, and at the same section it pur which defendants claim authority was not ports to provide an exclusive remedy in lieu of properly passed, and several pages of the all claims against an employer, and thereby pro

journals of the two houses of the Legislature hibits one spouse from recovering for loss of consortium by injury to the other caused

are pleaded, but are here omitted, the subthrough the fault of the master. (15) That the stance of the alleged informalities being that said act is discriminatory as between laborers the original bill as introduced was amended affected by its provisions in this: That it does in both houses in several particulars

does in both houses in several particulars, and not relate to laborers for the state, any counties, or any municipalities within the state, who may

| that the complete bill as finally amended was be engaged in similar employments, as laborers not read three times, as required by section working for private corporations, and it there- 19, art. 4, of the Constitution. There was a by denies to laborers for private persons, cor: I general demurrer to the complaint, which porations, associations, and enterprises the equal | protection of the law, which laborers for the being sustained, the plaintiff appeals. state, or any of the counties within the state, or Isham N. Smith. of Portland (Logan & any municipalities within the state, are guaranteed and retained.

Smith, of Portland, on the brief), for appel"The said act is violative of the Constitution lant. Geo. M. Brown, Atty. Gen., and J. O. of the United States and of the state of Oregon Bailey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondents. in the following particulars: (1) It violates section 4, art. 4, of the Constitution of the United States in this: That it deprives injured work

1 MCBRIDE, J. (after stating the facts as ingmen within its purview of a republican form above). [1, 2] The complaint and the able and of government by vesting judicial and executive ingenious brief of counsel for plaintiff point powers in the same officers. (2) It is violative of amendment 7 and amendment 14, § 1, of

out 19 alleged specific violations of the Conthe Constitution of the United States, and of stitution of this state, an commit

| stitution of this state, all committed within section 10, art. 1, and section 17, art. 1, of the compass of a single act, and then, piling the Constitution of Oregon, in that it deprives Pelion on Ossa, specifies four alleged violaa workman, injured through the fault of his master, of the right to trial by jury, and also

tions of the Constitution of the United States, denies such workman of the right to recover indi- perpetrated by means of the same statute. vidually for the individual wrongs committed It would be, indeed, a reflection upon republiagainst him, and denies the right to recover al can government if a bill which is so permeatsum commensurate with the injuries sustained. (3) It deprives injured workmen of property

ed with the rottenness of unconstitutionality without process of law in violation of Amend- could pass both houses of the Legislature ment 14, § 1, of the Constitution of the United with only three dissenting votes, and thereStates in this: It does not require a trial be- after be indorsed by the people upon a referfore the Oregon Industrial Accident Commis- | sion. nor does it require notice of the time or endum by a majority of more than two to place of hearing to be given to such workmen, one. It may be premised that, assuming evnor afford him an opportunity to appear beforeery allegation as to the unconstitutionality such board in person or by counsel, nor does it lof the art is well taken plaintiff by shown require the protection of witnesses before such board for or against the claim of such injured

but one reason why he should be permitted to workmen, but it provides for a summary proce bring this suit, and that is because he is a dure in determining the extent and character of taxpayer of the state, and that by the unlawinjuries suffered by such workmen, as well as de- ful expenditure of the moneys appropriated termining the amount to be recovered within the limits prescribed, and limits the amount of by the state under the provisions of the act

be increased. State ex rel. v. Metschan, 32 , lic policy and humanity were never contemOr. 372, 46 Pac. 791, 53 Pac. 1071, 41 L. R. plated by the framers of the Constitution. A. 692.

"It is sufficient if the general subject of the act The allegations that the defendants threat-is contained in the title and is a fair index to

the legislation proposed, and if all the provisions en to deprive plaintiff of the right of trial by

of the act are germane to such subject and do jury and wrongfully claim to have power to not relate to matters wholly foreign thereto." determine the amount that plaintiff shall re- In re Willow Creek, 74 Or. 592, 615, 144 Pac. cover, etc., have no force whatever. If plaintiff has a right to sue in the courts, there is [4] It is also urged in the objection now manifestly no method whereby the defend- being considered, and elsewhere in the able ants can prevent his so doing. If they have brief of plaintiff, that the act in question atno right to determine his case for any reason, tempts to confer judicial and legislative functhere is no law which compels him to present tions upon the Industrial Accident Commishis claim to them or to abide their award if sion, and is therefore in contravention of secmade against his remonstrance. He can test tion 1, art. 3, of the Constitution, which is as their authority by ignoring them and bring- follows: ing his action either at common law or under "The powers of the government shall be dithe Employers' Liability Act as the fact may

vided into three separate departments-the leg

islative, the executive, including the adminiswarrant. The sufficiency of the facts in re

trative, and the judicial; and no person charged lation to the injury to permit a recovery un with official duties under one of these departder either aspect, not being relevant to the ments shall exercise any of the functions of anmatter in controversy, will not here be dis

other, except as in this Constitution expressly

provided.” cussed. [3] Under the first point made in the brief

This identical question is passed upon adare included several objections to the title of

versely to plaintiff's contention in Re Willow the act, which is as follows:

Creek, supra, at pages 610, 611, and that opin

ion and the authorities there cited are so con"An act creating the State Industrial Accident Commission and providing an Industrial Ac

clusive as to render further discussion of cident Fund, making an appropriation for the subject unnecessary. such fund and providing for the administra [5] Neither is it necessary to discuss the tion of the terms of this act, providing for question as to whether the Legislature bad the collection and disbursement of funds for the benefit, compensation and care of work- power to conter Judicial Tunctions up

Ork: power to confer judicial functions upon the men, prescribing the duties of employers and Commission. Section 9, art. 7, of the Constiworkmen subject to this act, and providing tution before amendment provided : penalties for a violation of the terms of this

"All judicial power, authority, and. jurisdicact, and abolishing in certain cases the de

tion not vested by this Constitution, or by laws fenses of assumption of risk, contributory

consistent therewith, exclusively in some other negligence and the negligence of a fellow

court, shall belong to the circuit courts; and servant in actions for personal injury and

| they shall have appellate jurisdiction and sudeath."

pervisory control over the county courts, and all Concerning this objection counsel in their other inferior courts, officers, and tribunals." brief observe:

As originally adopted section 1, art. 7, of "It is plain that the act provides a system of the Constitution read as follows: jurisprudence for the administration of all ques- "The judicial power of the state shall be vesttions relative to injuries received by workmen led in a

ed in a supreme court, circuit courts, and county in the course of their employment, save those

courts, which shall be courts of record, having specified in the act itself. It also creates a

general jurisdiction, to be defined, limited, and board; a fund, and makes appropriations there

ons there regulated by law, in accordance with this Con. from: provides : (a) For its administration; Istitution. justices of the peace may also be in(b) the collection and disbursement of its funds;

Si vested with limited judicial powers, and munic(c) the duties of employers and employés; (d)

ipal courts may be created to administer the penalties for its violation; and (e) abolishes cer

regulations of incorporated towns and cities." tain defenses in such cases." In our view every matter referred to in the

In 1911 this section was amended so as to title is germane to the purpose of the act. Its

read: object is to provide a system of actual volun

"The judicial power of the state shall be vest

Ted in one Supreme Court and in such other cou tary insurance for injured workmen. As a

as may from time to time be created by law. necessary part of the system, a fund is to be The judges of the Supreme and other courts raised whereof the employer shall contribute shall be elected by the legal voters of the state the larger part, the employé a small part,

or of their respective districts for a term of six

years, and shall receive such compensation as and the state a small portion. It would be may be provided by law, which compensation absurd and wholly outside the intent of the shall not be diminished during the term for Constitution to require that there should be which they are elected." Laws 1911, p. 7. one act to create the Commission and define! It would appear that the power of the Legits duties, another to prescribe the amount islature or of the people to confer judicial the employé should contribute, a third to fix powers upon any tribunal which it or they the amount that the state should contribute, may select is, by the force of this amendment, and a fourth to appropriate the money thus practically an unlimited one so long as the defined to be the state's contribution. Such different functions of government, executive, red-tape methods of accomplishing an object legislative, and judicial, are not so blended as justified by the highest considerations of pub- to contravene section 1, art. 3, of the Consti

[ocr errors]

tution, which, as shown in the case last cit-, Just what provision of the Constitution is ed, is not the case here.

violated we are not informed. It is a gen[6] It is next contended that the act is void eral principle that a person may, at any time, in that it violates section 10, art. 1, of the waive his right to bring an action upon a Constitution of this state, which is as fol- money demand unless there is a constitutionlows:

al or statutory provision prohibiting it, or it "No court shall be secret, but justice shall be is clearly against public policy to permit him administered openly and without purchase, com: 1 to do so. So it has been often held that a pletely and without delay, and every man shall have remedy by due course of law for injury contract whereby an employer attempts to done him in his person, property, or reputation." stipulate against the consequences of his own

And that also it is in violation of section 1 negligence is void because contrary to public of the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal policy; but what is or is not public policy Constitution, as it deprives a person of prop-is, in its last analysis, a legislative question, erty without due process of law. Neither of and we have yet to find an instance where these positions is well taken. Plaintiff's ar- a statute has been declared void because in gument proceeds upon the theory that the act the opinion of the court it would have been establishing the Industrial Accident Commis- better policy to have left it unenacted. This sion attempts to establish a court for the view of the act disposes of many of the contrial of causes without a jury, which it does stitutional questions raised by counsel. The not, and to compel workmen and employers to state proposes to employers and employés an adjust their grievances without their consent, accident and life insurance scheme, and ofwhich is contrary to the whole spirit and in- fers it to them in lieu of litigation. It does tent of the act. As before noted, the act not compel them to become participants in it leaves the employer free to accept the provi- or to contribute to it, but if they voluntarily sions of the act or to reject them as he may choose to do so, they waive any other remsee fit. If he gives notice that he rejects edy, because the statute provides as a part them, he is left to protect himself from ac- of the scheme that they must do so; and, as tions for personal injury by litigation in the before observed, by permission of the statute courts. It is true that the act has swept a party may waive or limit the quantum of away certain defenses heretofore available; his compensation for any possible prospective but, as this could have been done in any case, injury. The noncompulsory feature of the he has no legal reason to complain. If he act may be said to eliminate most of the obsees fit not to avail himself of the provisions jections urged upon constitutional grounds. of the act, he may still protect himself by [8] One objection, however, which is urged giving notice that he rejects its provisions. with much plausibility is that the act vioIt is not compulsory, and the arguments that lates section 7, art. 9, of the Constitution, apply with greater or less force to compulsory acts are here inapplicable. The state says "Laws making appropriations for the salaries to the employer and employé alike:

of public officers and other current expenses of "We present to you a plan of accident insur

the state shall contain provisions upon no other ance which you may accept or reject at your subject. own pleasure. If you accept, you must be The evident purpose of this provision was bound by its terms and limitations, if you reject it, the courts are open to you with every

to prevent matters foreign to the general constitutional remedy intact. Take your choice purpose of appropriation bills being attached between our plan and such remedies as the stat to them as riders, thereby taking advantage ute gives you."

of the necessity of the state for money to deDiscussing certain features of the Iowa fray its current expenses and to pay its offiCompensation Act, limiting the amount to be cers to

cers to pass measures that perhaps would allowed for certain injuries, Mr. Justice Mc

otherwise have been defeated. The instant Pherson, in the case of Hawkins v. Bleakley

act is not primarily an act to appropriate (D. C.) 220 Fed. 378, 381, says:

money to pay salaries or other current ex"The first twenty-two sections of this lengthy

penses. It is not an appropriation bill in the statute fix the liability of the employer and the rights of the employé. A scale of compensation

sense that bills providing for general current is fixed and made certain. Each party can expenses or salaries of the constitutional ofcome within the statute or remain outside of the ficers of the state are such. We have been statute. Each party has his election. Many of

cited to no case, in this state or elsewhere, the states for many years have had statutes fix. ing the liability with precision in cases of death, where a provision similar to the one at bar and in no instance has any court held such stat- has been construed in accordance with counute invalid. And why a statute cannot fix with

sel's contention, and in this state contempocertainty the damages to be allowed in case of the loss of an arm, leg, eye, or other injury israry legislat

rary legislative construction has been the rot perceived, and counsel fail to state any legal other way. Thus, at the first regular session or constitutional objection thereto."

of the Legislature held after the adoption of [7] It is further contended that the act is the Constitution, we find an act, entitled “An unconstitutional because it requires the em-act for the appointment of a librarian and deployé to elect, at the time of his employment fining his duties" (Laws 1860, p. 64), was and in advance of all injuries, whether or passed, creating the office of state librarian,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »