8. Workmen's compensation laws in the United In the year 1910, the legislature of the State of New York passed what is generally considered the first general workmen's compensation law in this coun try. In 1911, in the case of Ives vs. South Buffalo Railway Co., 201 N. Y. 271, the Court of Appeals declared the law unconstitutional. This was the first case to come before a higher court in the United States, in which the modern view of workmen's compensation was passed upon.
It became necessary to adopt a constitutional amendment in the State of New York, and it was not until 1913 that the present law went on the statute books. This law has been attacked in two cases, but has been sustained by the Court of Appeals in both.
The movement for workmen's compensation had received such impetus when the New York statute was passed in 1910 that, without waiting for a test in any one state, many of the states passed compensa tion laws. Seldom in the history of such beneficent legislation has the movement been so widespread in so short a period of time.
9. State present status of these laws may be summarized as follows: Thirty-two states and three territories have such laws in force, while Congress has passed a Federal compensation law designed to cover employes of the United States government and the Panama Railroad.
The law is optional, or, as it is often termed, elect ive in fourteen of the states and two territories as to all classes of employers. This, in other words, means that in these states and territories the law is not com pulsory upon any employer.
In tenof the states it is elective so far as the private employer is concerned, but compulsory for public em ployers, such as towns, cities, counties and states.
In eight of the states and one territory the law is compulsory as to both private and public employers. The Federal law, it should be stated, is also a com pulsory law.
In twenty-five of the states and two of the terri tories the employer who has chosen to pay compensa tion, or who may be compelled to do so under the law, must make due provision for the payment to his em ployes ; or if he chooses to insure them himself, he must prove to the duly constituted commission that he has the financial ability to do it.
Insurance or some other form of security is op tional in seven of the states and one of the territories.
A "state fund," as it has come to be called, which is a fund administered by the state but without any state guarantee back of it, is a compulsory form of com pensation in force in four states and one territory.
In seven of the states there is a state fund but it is not a monopoly, that is, private companies are per mitted to do business also, and they compete with the state fund.
In two states where there are state funds, the privi lege is granted to employers to assume their own risk. The regulations are very stringent, but if the em ployer can comply with the regulations and obtain the privilege, he may then secure his insurance in private companies.
Insurance is compulsory either in private or in semi state mutual associations in two states, and in sixteen states and two territories this form of insurance is written only by companies duly licensed therefor.
The act would probably have been made compul sory in most of the states were it not for some doubt as to the constitutionality of such action.
10. Main features of law.—The essential features of workmen's compensation, omitting various special provisions which are largely for the purpose of giv ing legal effect to the act, may be briefly set forth, using the New York act for reference, as follows: (a) The employments covered are both public and private, the principal business of which is of a hazard ous nature conducted for _pecuniary gain. Farm labor and domestic servants are not included in the group, but may be voluntarily brought under the scope of the act. It applies where five or more per sons are regularly employed in these hazardous trades.
It covers accidental personal injuries arising from and in the course of employment, and such diseases or infections as may result therefrom. It would not cover those cases where the injury was deliberately inflicted, or where it was due to or arose out of intoxi cation.
The real contentions which have arisen in connec tion with the administration of the act have come from a difference, of opinion as to whether the injury was "due to or arose out of or in the course of employ ment." It is evident that there is room for difference of opinion in the interpretation of this phrase. For instance, if the factory is closed for the day and the workmen, while standing in line waiting to receive their pay, begin to fool and one is injured; does this constitute an injury arising in the course of employ ment? A written notice of all injuries must be sent to the employer and the Commission within ten days of the injury or thirty days after death.