officer appointed by the mayor (alcalde), and two workmen elected by their comrades in the same occupation to which the injured person belonged. The tribunal was to make an effort to bring about an amicable agreement, but failing to do this it was to render its decisions by a majority vote. The procedure before these tribunals was to be brief, without legal formalities, and without appeal except for reasons specified, when the suit might be carried to the highest

court.

To those persons who were in favor of compensating the workmen for accidents the bill of 1894 represented a certain step in advance of the earlier bill, inasmuch as it clearly admitted the doctrine of the responsibility of the industry for the results of trade risk; but besides the very low scale of compensation the chief drawback of the bill, it was claimed, lay in the fact that it did not at all do away with the costly and burdensome litigation; on the contrary, it exaggerated this evil by creating two classes of accidents (those that could be traced to the fault of somebody and those that could be credited to trade risk), with two legal systems, but with a very indistinct line of demarcation between the two classes, because of the great difficulty of defining an accident due to trade risk. The bill met with strong opposition and failed to become a law.

Nearly five years passed before the matter of compensation for industrial accidents was again brought before the Spanish Cortes. A bill to that effect was introduced in the Senate on December 2, 1899, by the Government, in conformity with a royal decree of November 30, 1899. Based mainly upon the French accident compensation act of April 9, 1898, this bill presented a great advance over all preceding proposals. Several European countries had passed compensation acts in the intervening years, and throughout industrial Europe there was a general approach toward compulsory insurance. The peculiar distinction between the trade risk and all other accidents due to somebody's fault (which was the chief feature of the plan of 1894) was discarded. The bill of 1899 excepted accidents brought about intentionally or through gross negligence of the victim or through force majeure. As far as the extent of the law is concerned, the industries to which it was to apply were carefully designated, and it included practically all manufacturing and transportation, agricultural labor only as far as the handling of machinery, and a few other less important branches of industrial life. The Government-owned establishments were made subject to the law on equal terms with private undertakings. This list remained practically unchanged in the final text of the law.

As between compensation by pensions and by lump sums, the bill favored the latter. Instead of definite sums, as in the draft of 1894, the later bill made the compensation dependent upon the earnings

of the injured. Substitution of pensions for lump-sum payments was permitted to the employers, if they guaranteed these payments to the satisfaction of the beneficiaries. The organization of special trade courts by special legislation was promised, but until that time the cases arising under this law were to be made subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of first instance.

These were the chief characteristics of the bill as introduced in the Senate on December 2, 1899, and sent to a special committee on December 5. On December 12 the bill was reported back from the committee with important changes, and further changes were made during the debates on the floor of the Senate, so that when passed on December 23 the bill differed considerably from the bill as introduced by the Government. Thus all employers who employed not over five workmen and who worked with them were excepted from the provisions of the law. On the other hand, while the original bill excepted manufacturing establishments where only human or animal energy is utilized, the exception of animal energy was taken out; to the establishments handling explosives or inflammable substances were added those handling toxic and unhealthy substances, and the work of loading and unloading was also added. Several minor concessions were granted to the injured and their dependents; to the death benefits were added funeral expenses not to exceed 100 pesetas ($19.30); actual earnings were substituted for average wages; the minimum wage was increased from 1 peseta (19.3 cents) to 11 pesetas (29 cents); and the maximum of 7 pesetas ($1.45) was stricken out; on the other hand, the age of children entitled to compensation, which was placed at 23 in the original bill, was reduced to 16 years, and in case of substitution of a pension to the widow for a lump-sum payment the pension was to be discontinued at remarriage and the pension of children at the age of 16. The most important change in the bill was the exemption of all accidents "due to the manifest fault of the victim," instead of those "due to the voluntary act or inexcusable fault of the victim." The term "manifest fault," while more difficult to define and limit, is much broader and permits of broader interpretation than "inexcusable fault."

The bill, in the form indicated, was placed before the Congress of Deputies on January 2, 1900, and referred to a committee, which reported favorably without change on January 12. Although the bill was thus recommended, the committee of the lower house expressed its opinion that the ideal solution of the problem would have been through voluntary insurance in mutual funds for each industry, but that such a system required a higher degree of education and development than Spain could claim at the time, and therefore for the present the system of direct compensation was the better.

67725°-VOL 2-11-53

The changes in the bill on the floor of the lower chamber were few, but some of them were important, namely, the two senate amendments were stricken out-the one excluding from the action of the law establishments with five or fewer employees, and the other excluding accidents due "to the manifest fault of the victim." It was stated above that in the Senate this last phrase was substituted for "voluntary act or inexcusable fault." In striking out the reference to the "manifest fault," the lower house did not replace the preceding formula, and the bill in its later form was even more liberal than it was originally, only injuries due to vis major being excepted; the other changes were of a minor nature. The bill passed the Congress of Deputies on January 18, 1900; a joint commission accepted. all the changes made in the lower house, and in its final form the bill was adopted in both chambers on January 27 and signed on January 30, 1900.

LEGISLATION IN FORCE.

The law of January 30, 1900, establishes the main principles, but goes little into details of procedure and administration. The Government was directed to publish all necessary regulations within six months. Several royal decrees formulating the necessary rules have been promulgated since then, namely, the decree of July 28, 1900, forming a complete set of by-laws; the decree of August 27, 1900, in regard to accident insurance companies; and the decrees of March 26 and July 2, 1902, extending the application of the law to the War and Navy departments, respectively. In addition, a large number of less important "royal orders" (real orderes) interpreting certain articles of the law or modifying preceding decrees were promulgated from time to time. In the following analysis of the law all decrees and orders up to the close of 1910 have been considered:

INJURIES COMPENSATED.

The law guarantees compensation for all injuries to employees arising out of or in the course of employment, unless caused by vis major and altogether extraneous to the employment in which the injury occurs. As stated above, the exception of "accidents intentionally brought about by or due to the manifest fault of" the employee was stricken out in the lower house and only an indirect qualification as to fraud, imprudence, or negligence is left in the provision; when the accident is due to such conduct, the case must be carried to the criminal court, and the claim of the injured must be adjudged in harmony with the decision of that court. This provision applies to the employer as well as to the employee. Claims for damages for accidents not covered by this law remain subject to the provisions of the Civil Code.

INDUSTRIES AND PERSONS INCLUDED.

The extent of the application of the law is carefully stated. It covers factories, mills, and workshops in which other than human energy is used; mines, salt mines, and quarries; metallurgical establishments, machine shops, and navy-yards; building and construction, and repairing, including the bricklayers' occupation, and subsidiary occupations, as those of carpenters, locksmiths, stonecutters, painters, etc.; establishments manufacturing or handling explosives, inflammable, injurious, or poisonous materials; construction, repair, and maintenance of railroads, harbors, roads, canals, dams, aqueducts, irrigation, and similar works; agriculture and forestry establishments utilizing motors with other than human power (the law applying only to those employees in these establishments who are exposed to the danger from the machinery); transportation on land and water, including high sea and internal navigation; fishing and other similar industries; street, sewer, and drain cleaning; warehouses, coal, wood, and lumber yards; wage-earners employed in theaters; fire extinguishing; gas works, electric stations, stringing and maintenance of telephone wires; installation, repair, and dismantling of electric wires and lightning rods; loading and unloading; and similar industries not specifically mentioned in the above list.

The law applies also to arsenals, power and ammunition works, and similar establishments owned by the Government; to establishments owned by the provincial and local communal governments, and to all public works. Special regulations concerning the application of the law to the employees of the War and Navy ministries were approved on March 26, 1902, and July 2, 1902, respectively. Accidents in military exercises and maneuvers and target practice have been included within the protection of the law.

The law applies to all workmen performing manual labor outside their own residences for some other person, whether with or without compensation, and including helpers and apprentices. In the Ministry of War the law applies not only to civilians employed in manual labor but also to enlisted men, not above the class of sergeant, performing such labor.

BENEFITS.

The entire cost of compensation rests upon the employer. In the case of work given out by contract, the primary responsibility rests upon the contractor, but this does not destroy the subsidiary responsibility of the owner of the establishment. The state, provincial, and communal governments are treated like private employers for the purposes of this law.

The compensation paid may be classified according to the following four classes of injuries: Those leading to temporary disability, to permanent total disability, to permanent partial disability, and to death.

In case of temporary disability the injured employee receives from the employer an allowance equal to one-half of his daily wage from the day of accident until the day of recovery from disability or determination of the degree of permanent disability, or up to the end of one year. This allowance is paid for every day, including the holidays. If, after the expiration of that year, the disability still continues, the case must be treated as one of permanent disability. In addition to the allowance the employer must furnish the injured person with medical attention and drugs until recovery, or until such attention is no longer required. An exception is made for the injured enlisted man, who is supported by the State and receives medical treatment and medicines, but he is not entitled to the daily allowance in cases of temporary disability.

If the injury results in permanent total disability the employer must pay the injured employee an indemnity equal to two years' wages, but when the disability prevents the injured employee from working only at his usual occupation, but does not incapacitate him for all employment, the indemnity must equal only eighteen months' wages. When the disability for the usual occupation is only partial, though permanent, the employer must choose between providing the injured with some other employment at the old rate of wages or paying him an indemnity equal to one year's wages. These indemnities are in addition to those paid for temporary disability, and while treatment lasts medical help and drugs must be furnished. By the decree of July 28, 1900, the Government was authorized to institute a detailed investigation on the basis of experience gained from application of the law, with the view of preparing tables for the determination of various degrees of disability, which tables must conform to the rule that only such condition as prohibits any kind of labor be termed complete disability, while a condition prohibiting only the customary employment, but permitting some other occupation, must be considered as partial disability. In accordance with this order definite rules for determining the nature of permanent disability were established by the royal order of July 8, 1903. According to these rules the following injuries were to be considered as leading to total permanent disability: (1) Loss of both upper or both lower extremities, or of one upper and one lower extremity, or of their essential parts, i. e., hands or feet; (2) functional disorders of the locomotor apparatus, which as to consequences are analogous to loss of parts, of equal gravity with that of preceding rule; (3) loss of both eyes or of vision in both eyes; (4) loss of one eye, with loss of vision