ARTICLE B--DIGESTS OF VARIOUS STATUTES, WITH NOTES AND

1. Various methods of administration.

The administration and procedure under no two of the compensation acts of the American States are exactly alike. The contrast in many instances is very great. In fact, the revolution wrought by the adoption of the compensation principle is nowhere more strongly emphasized than in the manner in which controversies growing out of claims for compensation are determined. A very strong tendency has developed to abolish entirely trial by jury in all such disputes. Moreover, in some cases, the ordinary courts have been abolished as well, so far as such controversies are concerned. A very long step has been taken in this direction, with a suddenness which must cause a shock to all those who have been educated to the belief that the jury system was the principal remaining safeguard to the rights of the

Various methods of administration

average citizen, as against the encroachment of so-called special privilege.

Arguments which might, without exaggeration, be termed a hue and cry, have been advanced in condemnation of judges and judge-made law and have been coupled with the demand that both judges and judicial decisions shall be subject to recall by popular vote. The most remarkable part of the present movement is, that heretofore employers and lawyers defending master and servant negligence cases invariably have been more fearful of the verdict of a jury than of the decision of any court or judge. It has become a common-place remark, in such litigations, that if the case went to the jury a judgment would be rendered in favor of the employé. Yet in this class of cases alone trial by jury has been abolished. To take its place new courts (although they are not called courts) have been created with appointed judges and with powers more extensive than ever before have been possessed by executives, administrative officers or bodies, cr judicial tribunals in America. Obviously, this is a big step. Whether it is in advance or backwards time only can tell.

Curiously enough, New York, which is the most important State in the Union as regards population, manufacture and wealth, has taken the longest step on this heretofore untrodden path. Acting, apparently, on the authority given by the people themselves, in the Constitutional amendment of 1913, the Legislature has created a body called a Workmen's Compensation Commission, with important executive, administrative, judicial, and even legislative functions. As to each of these functions its decision is made supreme and absolutely final, on all questions of fact, and on many questions of law. It may create deputies, without limit as to number, whose decisions, when approved by their creator, are equally final. (§§ 61 and 64.) In exercising such vast powers these Commissioners "shall not be bound by the common law or statutory rules of evidence or formal rules

Various methods of administration

of procedure, except as provided by this Chapter." (§ 68.) The Commission may make rules which will have the effect of statutes so long merely as they are "not inconsistent with this chapter;" relating to nine specified matters, including "The nature and extent of the proofs and evidence, and the method of taking and furnishing the same, to establish the right to compensation;" the "method of making investigations, physical examinations and inspections;" "the conduct of hearings, investigations and inquiries," and "carrying into effect the provisions of this chapter." (§ 67.) And the decisions of the Commission made under the Act proper, and under rules having the force of statutes made by the Commission itself, "shall be final on all questions of fact." (§ 20). Moreover, it not only enacts the law, in many important particulars, but it is at once client, judge and jury, and in this triple capacity decides questions of fact in controversies to which it is itself a party and makes determinations which no power on earth can question, so far as the facts are concerned.

This Commission also collects a State insurance fund. It determines the premiums to be charged and the reserves necessary to pay losses. It appoints all assistants. When a claim is made against it, as the administrator of the fund, it hears and determines all questions arising on such a controversy, under rules of a statutory nature made by itself and which can be changed at will, and here again, its decisions on all questions of fact are absolutely final.

It is a highly political institution, because it will distribute more patronage, probably, than any other body in the State. It has power to create an army of public officers and fix their remuneration and tenure of office. The Commission has many more important powers and duties which it is unnecessary to here enumerate.

So while abolishing trial by jury and taking away from the regular courts of record all jurisdiction over compensation cases, a new court has been created, the workings of which will be watched with very great interest.

Various methods of administration

Many constitutional questions are involved in this new movement which it would not be profitable to discuss in this place.

Many of the other States have established industrial boards or commissions, with more or less extensive powers, but in none of the States has the legislature gone so far as it has in New York in this direction. Doubtless, it is necessary, or at least advisable, that any compensation law should be supervised by some public body. It has been complained in New Jersey, for example, that this was the one weakness of that statute. That is, that there was no one whose duty it was to see that the compensation payments were properly made. Commissioner Bryant of the Labor Department of New Jersey has stated that in investigations which his Department conducted a number of cases were found in which inadequate payments were made.

The remedy, however, under the New Jersey law, for cases of this character seems to be entirely adequate. If the employer has failed to make the payments which the law requires, any receipt or release which has been taken is of no avail in a proceeding brought by the employé to have the compensation determined. The employé does not have to show that fraud has been practiced, but merely that payments have not been made as required by the statute. So far as the disclosures made up to the present time are concerned, the evil which is to be met, does not seem to justify the elaborate and expensive system which has been established in New York to meet it. As employés become more and more familiar with the law, cases of inadequate payment will be found to be very rare, under the rule in New Jersey where any agreement can be examined and set aside on the ground merely that the payments were not as great as the statute required.

In a few of the States, as already indicated, controversies are determined by judges of the local courts without a jury. The proceeding is considered as one in equity and is deter