USA > Ohio > Ohio legislative history, 1913-1917 > Part 23
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56
17
258
OHIO LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.
by the Supreme Court of Ohio in 1890, and was Professor of Law at Ohio State University, 1893-1909. Mr. Randall was appointed Reporter of the Supreme Court in 1895. He is author of many books on archae- ology and history and joint author of a history of Ohio, five volumes (Century Co., New York). Mr. Randall was united in marriage with Miss Mary A. Coy, October 28th, 1874.
FRANK E. McKEAN, Clerk of Supreme Court
First term (elected) February 6th, IgII, to February 2nd, 1913.
Second term (elected) February 3rd, 1913, to February Ist, 1915.
NOTE. On February 11th, 1913, the General Assembly amended Sec- tion 1500 General Code providing for the appointment of the Clerk of Supreme Court by the Supreme Court. Mr. McKean continued to serve as Clerk by virtue of his elec- tion until July Ist, 1916, when he was appointed by the Court for a term of two years.
NOTE. A complete biography of Mr. McKean can be seen in volume I of this work.
259
OHIO LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.
SEBA H. MILLER, Deputy Clerk of Supreme Court
Seba H. Miller was born July 2nd, 1879, at Farmersville, in Jack- son Township, Montgomery County, Ohio. His father James Carlton Miller was a native of the State of Maryland, having removed to Ohio in 1864 at the age of 14. His mother was Cordelia Catherine Swartsel before her marriage to his father; her grandfather Abram Swartsel was one of the first settlers of Montgomery County, and the first in Jackson Township, having removed from Pennsylvania.
Mr. Miller received public school and high school education at Farmersville, and was graduated from Wittenberg College, Springfield, Ohio, in June, 1901; he then took a course in shorthand writing at Willis Business University in Springfield and studied law at home and in the offices of Summers & Beard, John L. Plummer and Frank M. Krapp of that city, where he was employed as stenographer.
Admitted to the Bar June 27, 1905, and practiced law being asso- ciated with Senator Plummer and Mr. Krapp, until April 1, 1907, when he was appointed stenographer in office of Clerk of Supreme Court by Joseph G. Obermeyre. On March II, 1908, Mr. Miller was appointed Second Deputy Clerk by Clerk Obermeyre and served as such under him and also under Clerks John S. McNutt and Frank E. Mckean, until October Ist, 1911, when he was appointed First Deputy Clerk by Mr. McKean, which position he now holds.
Mr. Miller was married May 10, 1900, to Alta E. Day, of Farmers- ville, Ohio, and has three children, Ralph aged 16, Gwendolyn aged 14 and Carlton, aged 12.
NOTE-Mr. Floyd Atwill also a Deputy Clerk of Supreme Court is recorded with a full biography on page 535 of volume I of this history.
260
OHIO LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.
EDWARD ANTRIM, Supreme Court Librarian
The Marshal and Librarian of the Ohio Supreme Court since 1913 is Edward Antrim who was born at West Elkton, Preble County, Ohio, November 5th, 1866. His father Benjamin Antrim (now dead) was a native of Preble County, Ohio, and he was a veteran of the American Civil War.
Edward Antrim was educated in the public schools and he was for more than a decade connected with the Common Pleas and Circuit Courts of Butler County, Ohio. During the 6Ist and 62d Congresses Mr. Antrim was employed in the House of Representatives at Wash- ington. He was appointed Marshal and Librarian by the Supreme Court
of Ohio in 1913.
On July 3Ist, 1895, Mr. Antrim was joined in marriage with Miss Dora Brunner of Hamilton, Ohio, and they are blessed with six chil- dren, five daughters and a son.
SOLDIERS OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR: employed at the State Capitol Building as Guards and Visitors' Attendants in 1918
Sitting Left to Right: - JOHN REED, Co. C, 174th O. V. I., Age 74 years - CAPTAIN L. H. WELLS, Supt. Capitol Grounds, Co. F, 1st O. V. C., Age 74 years - JOHN W. LAIRD, Co. K, 36th O. V. V. I., Age 73 years - J. W. LEIDIGH, Co. C, 64th O. V. V. I., Age 78 years - FRANCIS M. Roor, Co. F, 2nd Battalion, 18th U. S. A., Co. C, 10th O. V. C., Age 75 years.
Standing Left to Right: - ROBERT POWLSON, Co. B, 122nd O. V. I., Age 75 years - G. H. McGUIRE, Co. G, 103rd O. V. I., Age 75 years - BENJAMIN F. THURSTON, U. S. Navy, first enlistment, and Co. H, 20th Maine Infantry, Age 72 years - H. C. STRATTON, Co. F, 110th O. V. I., Age 71 years.
THE GRAND ARMY OF THE REPUBLIC
To the man of today who lived through the trying period of the American Civil War and was witness to the stirring scenes of that lamentable conflict between the North and South during the years 1861- 1865, when he again sees the best young blood of the nation responding to the call to arms in order to preserve human liberty throughout the world, the sight which has so often greeted our eyes, of the old veterans with fife and drum and flags flying, escorting the young and gallant recruits on to camp and battlefield brings the solemn yet glorious thought that a government made up of such men can never be made to submit to any brutal attack against civilization. As the eyes of the brave old veterans grow dimmer and their steps more faltering a grateful republic will continue to cherish their brave deeds of patriotism in the dark days of the Civil War.
The group picture shown on the opposite page consists entirely of soldiers of the American Civil War, employed at the State Capitol Building as guards and visitors' attendants in 1918.
263
CHAPTER I
Governor Cox Again Nominated and Elected in 1916
I N the presidential year of 1916 the Democratic party in Ohio again chose Governor Cox for its standard bearer in the gubernatorial contest he being nominated at the popular primary in August without opposition. At the election which was held November 7th the total vote cast for governor was 1, 174,057, Governor Cox receiving 568,216, Frank B. Willis, Republican, 561,602, Tom Clifford, Socialist, 36,908, and John H. Dickason, Prohibition candidate, 7,347. The plurality for Governor Cox was 6,616.
The second inaugural of Governor Cox took place on the second Monday in January, 1917, and almost on the threshold of his ad- ministration war was declared by the United States against the ag- gressions of Germany. In response to the call of President Wilson for volunteers and the mobilization of the National Guard Governor Cox immediately responded with all his energies and with such leffect that Ohio proudly stands erect among the first of the states to furnish a full volunteer army division of her best sons for the defense of world democracy. Other war activities have taken practically all of the Gov- ernor's time since war was declared in 1917, and a great work in sup- port of the general government at Washington has been accomplished by the Ohio Branch Council of National Defense. A number of most distinguished citizens and business men of Ohio, and one lady member comprises the board and their work will be appreciated by those who live in the future. Governor Cox is active chairman of the board.
264
CHAPTER II Message of Governor James M. Cox of Ohio, to the Eighty-Second General Assembly
To the General Assembly:
W ITH the beginning of the new constitutional regime four years ago, and while facing the responsibilities imposed at that time, I made this official observation :
"It requires considerable faith in the righteousness of a cause to turn face from the old order of things, mindful that the policies of government about to be adopted involve the hopes and aspirations - the happiness and general welfare of five million human souls. But history tells us that while we can profit immeasurably by the experience of the past, every government that has endured kept its face toward the sunrise and not the sunset of civilization. We reverence the works of our fathers, and seek to prove the worthy sons of worthy sires, by making as great development in our time as they made in theirs. Ours is not the creed of the cynic, looking with scorn upon the institutions of yesterday. Civilization is simply a relay race, and unless we take it up with the freshness of spirit with which our fathers began it, the generation is in a condition of certain decay."
That was the controlling thought then as it is now, because in theory it was based upon the philosophy and justice of government and in practice, the laws passed pursuant to that policy have proved both efficient and humane. Let me impress upon you, however, with most respectful emphasis, that progress is made by two distinct stages and if results are to justify the basic principle, there must be twc objectives: First, the drafting of the laws with such forethought as the finite mind possesses, and second, the most vigilant and sympathetic administration of them. Newly cleared ground is more susceptible of rank undergrowth than either the forest or the tilled soil, and in this biennial period when your responsibilities and mine are in common, we must, in order to approach the maximum possibilities for the general good, hold to the fundamentals upon which the new legislation was based, and go no further in this session than to provide for accruing necessities. Unrestrained theory would soon turn the thought of the state to reaction, and the public estimate would be that we were con-
265
266
OHIO LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.
trolled more by caprice than constructive capacity. The laws that came from the new constitution four years ago, have stood the test of time, and they have successfully run the gauntlet of sustained, insidious and artful oppostion. They are structurally sound, and we should be sure that the revision made is but the logical adjustment of an unaltered principle to changing conditions.
Of first importance is the proposal to strengthen the workmen's compensation law, and I most earnestly recommend the adoption of the initiated bill on that subject. When the law was passed, it was desired to displace liability insurance with a plan of guaranteed com- pensation to injured workmen and dependents, without recourse to law.
Liability insurance, in its very essence, is opposed, if not repugnant to the principle of compensation. The former gave very uncertain relief to the toiling masses - the latter assures immediate relief. We do not go beyond the unquestioned truth in the statement that the con- ditions of social unrest, of impatience with, if not a resentful feeling toward the courts, and glaring injustices in every community where there was located shop, mill or mine, grew out of the practices of liability insurance. The amendment now recommended simply carries into effect, by letter, the spirit of the statute. Let us in entire fairness recount the detailed opposition that was made to the workmen's compensation bill by the liability insurance companies when it was on hearing before the joint committees of the two houses :
First: It was contended that the administrative cost to the state would be one million dollars or more. In the year 1916, with an unprece- dented industrial activity, the expense has been less than three hundred thousand dollars.
Second: It was urged that the liability companies could carry on the work better than the state because they were trained in it, and the state was not. The answer to this is that the liability companies had never engaged in the compensation business, while the industrial com- mission had experience, as a matter of fact, under the voluntary com- pensation law. Developments have so thoroughly demonstrated the fallacy of these two claims that they are no longer maintained.
Third: A very ingenious propaganda was established, and has been continued for the purpose of playing upon the fear and appre- hension of the employer by painting the mirage of probable lawsuits.
When the measure was first drawn the insurance companies sent representatives to chambers of commerce and trades bodies generally, and pointed out to them that the state plan of workmen's compensation did not give them full protection, while insurance with the liability com- panies did. This theory was based upon the constitutional provision
267
OHIO LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.
that suit could be brought against the employer of labor, either by the injured or the dependent, if the accident resulted from the willful act of the employer, or the violation of the safety laws of the state.
Now let us analyze that feature: Every consideration of public policy suggests that no one shall be insured against the consequences of an unlawful act. No man whose conscience tells him the difference between right and wrong will contend differently. That is the moral view of it, at least. What the legal and constitutional aspect is, the supreme court will decide. If it should hold that the practice is not offensive to the constitution, it is a reasonable certainty that public de- sire and insistence will lead to an amendment to the constitution. I have no hesitation in expressing the belief that the ultimate policy, established, if need be, by constitutional change, will bar any system, either through insurance or otherwise, from protecting man, or corpora- tion, that commits an act, declared plainly by statute to be illegal. Therefore, in my judgment, at least, it is safe to assume that the state plan of insurance will give the maximum protection under the constitution, and no one can do more. In order to ascertain whether this will contribute to more than very sporadic litigation, or justifies any alarm by the employer, we need not speculate as to the future. The answer is found from the experience of the past. Since the adop- tion of the law there have been 300,000 industrial accidents, and only seventeen suits have been brought against employers who paid into the state insurance fund. Exclusive of the McWeeney case, which occurred under what is now an abrogated law, there was but one single verdict. rendered by the court against the employer in the list of seventeen, and that was for two thousand dollars. Five cases were settled out of court, four were decided in favor of the employer, one was dismissed by the employe, one was dismissed by the court, and four are still pending. More than one thousand firms carry their own insurance under state consent, and against these institutions but five suits have been brought. Against the employers who have reinsured with the liability insurance companies, eight suits have been instituted, making a total of thirty lawsuits from all sources. These figures are produced from the official records of the Industrial Commission.
Nor are we dependent in our guidance on what has occurred within the state, but can look to the much wider experience of England. In 1908 the National Association of Manufacturers appointed a com- mittee to investigate the question of preventing accidents and providing industrial relief. Ferdinand C. Schwedtman and James A. Emery were designated as counsel for the association to visit Europe and study every phase of the matter. Their report took the form of a book, and is
268
OHIO LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.
known as "Accident Prevention and Relief." It was published in 19II by the National Association of Manufacturers of the United States of America. There is this difference between the Ohio law and the British act. In our state if the employe resorts to the courts, he has no further right under the compensation law. Relief must be entirely through litigation. In England, the workman can prosecute his claim under the common law, and if he fails in the action brought, he can ask the judge immediately to assess his claim if valid, under the compensa- tion act. In such event, the court in its discretion can deduct a part or all of the award to meet the costs incurred in the defeated proceed- ing at law, and yet, with the encouragement to litigation which the British act gives, there is a constant diminution in the number of suits brought. The report in question summarizes this phase of the matter as follows :
"That workmen are content to accept the certainties of the compensation act as against the speculative possibilities of recovery under the employers' liability act, seems evident from the fact that in 1909 there were but 204 actions brought under that statute as against 260 in 1908, 343 in 1907, and 476 in 1906."
Having been associated with the drafting of the compulsory act in Ohio, and with its initial administration, I know full well that the first objectives in mind were, guaranteed compensations, prevention as far as possible of all legal contention between labor and capital, and such co-ordination in the administration of this law and the safety laws as would bring about a decrease in the number of accidents. In order to discourage litigation, it was not only provided that the employe lost his right under the compensation law if he went to the courts, under the common law, but in the event of his so doing, the employer had restored to him two of the old common law defenses. In this precaution we went just as far as the constitution permitted, and no one will deny that the limitations in that organic instrument are justified. If the initiated amendment is adopted then the employers of labor must either come under the state fund, or avail themselves of the provisions of section twenty-three and carry their own insurance, after giving satisfactory bond that accidents will be reported as they occur, and that payments will be made under the schedules prescribed. They will have no right, however, to re-insure with liability companies. Section twenty-three was carried into the law with the full knowledge and consent of every interest friendly to it. A number of large corporations which maintain their own hospitals and give first aid to the injured workman asked that this personal relation be not disturbed. It was so obviously calculated to promote better feeling between labor and capital that it was accepted.
269
OHIO LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.
Reports from the industrial commission show that the liability companies now insure barely five per cent of the workmen of the state. Every year the percentage runs against them in such measure as to in- dicate that practically all employers who do not desire to carry their own insurance prefer to come in under the state fund. It is well to make comparison of premium costs assessed by the state fund and by liability companies. In the state of New York, where liability insurance is given wide latitude under the compensation law, official statistics which have never been challenged show that at least thirty per cent of their premiums go for expenses and profits. In Ohio the state premiums are less than seven per cent and yet an actuarial survey shows that the rates are not sufficient for the liability companies, operating under the supervision of the New York Insurance Department to carry a profit-in fact, a loss is shown. If there were no state insurance in Ohio, and liability com- panies, under the supervision of the Industrial Commission were carry- ing the business at the rates charged in New York, then the yearly cost to our employers, instead of being $5,500,000, would be $9,167,000. In other words, the present law is saving our industries three and two- thirds million dollars annually. The opposition to the further strengthen- ing of the law has published broadcast a statement that this proposed enactment is the forerunner of the state government going into the life and fire insurance business. The plan of holding compensation entirely apart from the participation of liability insurance companies is not based in the slightest degree on the doctrine of government ownership, as that term is generally understood. There is this very marked differ- ence in the conduct of insurance companies. Life and fire concerns regard the prompt and satisfactory adjustment of losses as a distinct asset in policy, while the liability companies made peculiar appeal to a part of their clientele at least, in the old days, by the artful manner in which they evaded any payment whatsoever. The argument was ad- vanced when the compulsory act was passed, that the matter of adjust- ing industrial losses would become a political detail, and result in in- efficient service and excessive cost. Experience thoroughly disproves that and you need not be reminded that an attempt has been made to carry this sacred function of government into the political activities of the day by the very agencies that ascribed this tendency to others. At no time in all the history of Ohio, if my power of observation possesses any accuracy, has any special interest ever expended so much money and effort as the liability insurance companies in an attempt to perpetuate administrative policies favorable to their designs. The time has now come to stop commercializing industrial tragedy. Neither practical nor ยท moral consideration can support it. The manufacturer does not want
270
OHIO LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.
it, the laboring people protest against it, and it is repugnant to the public conscience. A co-operation with the injured-a trusteeship for the widow and orphan must be maintained, and it is too holy a trust to be transferred to any business enterprise. If the general assembly writes this strengthening and protecting provision into the workmen's com- pensation law of Ohio, it will not only respond to the call of five mil- lion toilers within our confines, but make a contribution to government and society that will be an inspiration to other commonwealths where the battle is not yet won. Able counsel are agreed that the amendment is constitutionally sound, and that it will put an end to serious legal opposition to the Ohio act.
There has been criticism of the rural school law but it comes largely from misunderstanding. Rarely was there a more exhaustive, intelligent and painstaking survey of any subject than that made before the draft- ing of the Ohio code. It affords the opportunity for almost complete transformation of rural conditions, and gives communities the chance to educate the youth in their own townships under facilities equal to those enjoyed in the cities. Wherever it has been tested with an environ- ment of sympathetic understanding, it has brought joy to the household and exalted the function of government. You will pardon the personal reference to the close application which I brought to the subject when the law was passed, and the investigation that I have made in a large majority of the counties since then, for the purpose of observing at first hand the actual local conditions. Nothing could be more reac- tionary than to so change this law as to impair its fundamental principle. It may be that experience suggests alterations in detail, but they should not go beyond that. Most of the things complained of are not the fault of the law, but of the counties and townships that fail to give that vigilant attention to local educational matters which would render abuses by local school officials impossible. The facility is inherent in the law itself to meet either delinquency or excess. Oversupervision has been corrected in many counties, and it can be in all. Any law designed for a great service, and sound and ambitious in its plan must have, if it succeeds, the most awakened co-operation of every interest involved, and the school law touches every home in the country side. When the code was molded into form the whole underlying theory was not only to give unprecedented opportunity for education to the rural youth, but to tie its administration close to the citizen right of the parent. Our people must realize that the maximum of local authority, perforce exacts more than the minimum of local vigilance. There need be no fear as to the final outcome. Ohio will not step backward in education. The structure that has been builded will be blessed by every community that is privileged to have a physical demonstration of it.
27I
OHIO LEGISLATIVE HISTORY.
The present financial need of cities, and some villages and rural subdivisions, is a matter that I present for your most serious thought. The Smith One Per Cent law was designed for the purpose of protect- ing local taxing subdivisions from excessive rates in taxation. While some who hold to the home rule principle in government believe that this was a trespass against the real principle of a democracy, there can be no question about the law's deep entrenchment in the favor of the ma- jority of the people of the state. It was passed under the administration of Governor Harmon. Both to its form and principle; he gave much time and thought. Profound in the law, and statecraft, his sponsorship gave it a strong appeal to the favorable consideration of communities.
The law fixed the limit of taxation at ten mills, with the right to go to fifteen mills, by vote of the people. Under its operation, real estate was increased in its assessed value all over the state, and it was the hope that the arbitrary reduction in rate to not more than fifteen mills in any event, would bring large amounts of personal property to the duplicate, which had, by the almost binding force of custom and with apparent general consent, not been listed previously. If a thoroughly honest tax return were made, particularly in the cities, present emer- gencies would not exist, and the theory of the Smith law would be justi- fied in the fullest sense.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.