rehearing denied; Tulsa Rig, Reel and Manufacturing company v. John H. and Etta Arnold, plaintiff's petition for rehearing denied; Gurlach bank of Woodward v. D. C. Herd, defendant in error's motion to affirm order dismissing judgment of trial court denied, plaintiff in error given ten days to serve and file brief, defendant in error given 20 days thereafter for reply brief, motion to continue for term denied; City of Lawton v. Jennie B. Johnson, dismissed at plaintiff's cost; George Wolff v. German American Farmers Mutual Insurance company, 20 days given both sides to file brief; David Ross v. B. F. Wirts, 30 days from April 21 for defendant in error to file and serve answer brief, plaintiff given 20 days to serve reply; Mattie Dandridge v. P. C. Dandridge, defendant given 30 days from April 21 to file and serve reply brief; James M. Barnett v. John S. Bilby, stricken from April assignment and set for oral argument in July term; Sallie Chissoe Childers et al. v. Jacob Folsom, et al., order dismissing appeal vacated and cause re-instated, plaintiff given 15 days from date to file brief and defendant 20 days thereafter to file reply, application to file brief in another case denied. DIVISION No. 3. Commissioner Rittenhouse-W. H. Paul v. First State bank of Pauls Valley, Garvin county district court, reversed and remanded; Oklahoma Fire Insurance company v. Marie Kimpel, Muskogee county superior court, judg ment rendered; David Hawkins v. Boynton Land, M. & I. Company, Creek county district court, affirmed. Commissioner Hooker-George M. Werline v. Salmon C. Aldred, Woodward county district court, affirmed; Brown et al. v. Williams et al., Caddo county court, affirmed; Barteldes Seed company v. Mitchell et al., Oklahoma county superior court, affirmed. Commissioner Bleakmore-Mark L. Bozarth et al. v. John O. Mitchell et al., Tulsa county district court, reversed and remanded; Walter Reynolds et al. v. M. M. Ryan, LeFlore county court, affirmed. Orders-Bryan County State bank v. Com. National bank, dismissed for want of prosecution; First National bank v. A. W. Everett, dismissed for want of prosecution; Midland Valley Railroad company v. W. Y. McLemore, plaintiff 30 days from April 26 to file brief, defendant 30 days after that to file answer, stricken from assignment; McHenry v. Gregory, opinion withdrawn, corrected and refiled, petitions for rehearing denied; Pittsburgh Mtg. and Inv. company v. Robine et al., plaintiff in error given until June 15 to file reply brief; Edger Kerr v. J. H. Holland & Son, appeal dismissed; P. J. Nicholson v. M. C. Binion et al., plaintiff given until May 5 to file briefs, defendant in error given until June 5 to file answer brief; Rock Island v. S. W. Hammock, dismissed on motion of plaintiff in error; Emmet Brewer et al. v. Jackson Perryman et al., defendant in error, J. S. Dodson given until May 28 to file brief; A. S. Cleveland et al. v. W. E: Lumpkin et al., motion to amend petition in error by incorporat ing an additional assignment of error denied; J. H. Bach v. William Howald, mandate stayed pending hearing on petition for rehearing. DIVISION No. 4. Commissioner Matthews-W. D. Oliver v. Arthur White, Custer county court, appeal dismissed; St. Louis Carbonating and Manufacturing company v. Lookeba State bank, Caddo county court, reversed and remanded; St. Louis Iron Mountain and Southern Railroad v. W. P. Farley and Heber Skinner, Rogers county district court, appeal dismissed. Commissioner Davis-L. W. Lindsey and COMPENSATION FOR ERYSIPELAS In the case of Lyon F. Terry v. Wolverine Oil company, in which the plaintiff asked compensation because of erysipelas in one of his feet during his employment with the company, the industrial commission decided that the defendant company could not be held responsible in any way, and compensation was denied. From the statement of facts it is given that Terry while employed in certain work wore a pair of sixteen inch boots, which because of the fact that he had not been accustomed to heavy boots, rubbed a hole in heel of foot, which later developed erysipelas. The boot had more or less irritated his foot since first going into the field on December 5, but the infection did not show up until December 21. The commission disposing of the case said: case is The question presented in this whether the injury suffered by claimant is one coming under the provisions of the workmen's compensation law. Injury is defined as follows in sub-section 7, section 3, article 1: "Injury or personal injury" means only accidental injuries arising out of and in the course of employment and such disease or infection as may naturally and unavoidably result therefrom. It There can be little question but what injury arose in the course of employment, but is it one arising out of employment also? is necessary that the injury should arise out of as well as in the course of the employment, and without it does both the statute is not satisfied. "Accidental" is defined-Corpus Juris, vol. 1, page 396: "Happening by chance, or unexpectedly taking place not according to the usual course of things; casual; fortuitous." From the agreed statement of facts, it shows that his foot was irritated from December 5, that infection did not develop until December 21, that he continued to wear the offending shoe, and while we will not criticise claimant for so doing, it can hardly be said that it happened "by chance, unexpectedly; or not according to the usual course of things."' In the case of White v. Sheepwash, reported in vol. 3, Butterworth's Workmen's Compensation Cases, page 382, decided in 1910(Great Britain), the court held: Facts-Claimant was a general laborer and in sowing bone manure got his boots wet, put them away and did not use them for about a month and then wore them for about one week. In the course of his duties one day after putting boots on, his work was to walk behind and attend to a seed drill. Injured's foot became raw and inflamed and blood-poisoning set in. The court in its opinion said: "The inference of fact which I draw from the evidence is that his toe was injured by the pressure of a boot, which had shrunk and become too tight for him." It was contended that, even on this assump tion, his case came within the Workmen's Compensation Act, and entitled him to compensation under it. To establish this it must be shown (1) that the injury was the result of an accident and (2) that the accident arose "out of" as well as in the course of employ. ment. An accident has been defined by Lord Mac. naghter as an unlooked for mishap, or an untoward event, which is not expected or designed and this definition has been quoted and approved in the most recent case decided by the House of Lords. Can the scraping of his toe be regarded as an event unlooked for or unexpected by the wearer of boots which had become hardened and shrunk so much as to be too tight for him? I should say that from the first moment he put them on such a result must be regarded as not only probable but most inevitable. In my opinion the injury by the applicant was not the result of an accident within the meaning of the act. Neither in my opinion, did it arise out of his employment. My award must therefore be in favor of the respondent. A case more nearly in point could scarcely be found. The claimant has cited cases arising on accident insurance policies, but the commission does not consider these citations applicable, for the reason that the policies sued on do not require that the accidental injury should arise out of" and in the course of employ ment. White v. Sheepwash-Supra, has been followed by a number of the American states, and as this commission finds no authorities to the contrary, compensation will be denied. The opinion was written by Commissioner McDonald. Commissioners Jackson and Blessing concur. COMMISSION'S ORDER UPHELD That the corporation commission has jurisdiction to fix prices at which cotton may be ginned, was upheld by the Supreme Court in a case which the Oklahoma Gin company appealed to the high court. The commission fixed a price of 50 cents per 100 pounds for lint cotton, a maximum price of $2.50 a bale and $1 for bagging and ties, and said this price and no other should be charged by the Oklahoma Gin company. The commission fixed the prices on the question of reasonableness and a fair return on the investment. The court held that burden to show otherwise rested upon the gin company. The final action in the case will be of importance in the cotton industry in the state. GENERAL EFFICIENCY ORDER The corporation commission has issued an order requiring that all gas distributing corporations in the state must equip and maintain at all times their pipes and plants so that an adequate supply of gas may be furnished to consumers. The order becomes effective April 20. This action is taken following many complaints that have come to the commission during the last several months. Especially during the winter months have there been complaints of gas shortage. Heroic efforts have been made by the commission to bring about a better service and it has seen fit to take this action in the matter. A strict checking up of the results of the order will be made by the commission, and prosecutions will follow promptly where necessary in order to enforce the order. This applies to every corporation in the state distributing gas for domestic consumption. DAMAGE SUITS FOLLOW ACCIDENT Six damage suits resulting from a collision of an Iron Mountain train and a wagon filled with school children at Inola recently have been filed in the Oklahoma county district court against the railroad company, aggregating $100,000. Ruby Reynolds, 11 years, claims $15,000; Joe Reynolds, 6, $15,000; Thelma Reynolds, 8, $15,000; R. A. and Annie Reynolds, for death of daughter, $25,000; Eva Stiles, widow, $30,000 for death of husband, driver of wagon. The children were being taken to a consolidated school when the accident happened. WANTS TO BE A SOLDIER After District Judge Oldfield today had sentenced John Meisberger to three years in the penitentiary, on a charge of possessing a forged check, the judge remembered that the prisoner had previously asked the judge to be as lenient with him as possible because he wanted to join the navy and serve his country, the judge called Meisberger back and changed the sentence from three years to one year. Meisberger said that as soon as he served his sentence he would imme diately join the navy. With good behavior he will get out of prison in about seven months. STATE REGULATION OF LABOR'S HOURS AND PAY Two Important Cases Come From Oregon, Now Pending in the United States Supreme Court Decisions Expected Before the Court Adjourns for the Summer-One Involves Constitutionality of Minimum Wage Law, the Other Question of Limiting Hours of Labor of Men. Labor conditions throughout the United States may be revolutionized by either one of two cases now pending in the Supreme Court of the United States, which are expected to be decided before the court adjourns in June for the summer. Decisions in these cases are regarded as the most important of any expected from this tribunal for months to come. One of the cases involves the constitution ality under the American system of government of the State's prescribing a minimum wage in private industries. The case comes from Oregon, where the question arose as to the validity of a law fixing the minimum wage of women in the manufacturing establishments of Portland. The other case is likewise from Oregon, and involves the question of whether the State may limit the hours of labor for men in all industries. No other case testing the validity of legislation as to minimum wage in private enterprises has ever been before the court. As to the second case, there was before the court many years ago a case involving the constitutionality of a law limiting the hours of work of miners. The law was held constitutional because of the hazard of mining. Still more recently there came before the court a ease involving the validity of the New York statute limiting the hours of labor in bakeries to ten hours a day. That was held unconstitutional, and became a Presidential campaign issue. Importance of Present Case The present case derives much of its importance from the fact that it seeks in effect a reversal of the decision of the New York bakers' case, and goes on to establish the principle that all the States and the Federal Government, for that matter, may enact laws --and should enact them-limiting the hours of labor for men in all industries. Again, there have been cases before the court involving the constitutionality of laws regulating the hours of service of women. These, however, differ from the present case in that they were upheld on the theory that women were in a special class, deserving of special protection. The present case is not based on the theory that men are specially weak, but on the theory that society is injured by even the strongest members working long hours without time for rest, recreation, and moral and mental improvement. The minimum-wage case was argued before the court more than a year ago. Many rumors are current as to why it has not been decided. The task in the ten-hour-a-day case is to meet the decision of the court in the New York baker's case. The New York statute was annulled in that case because the court found there was no "common undestanding'. as to any relationship between a ten-hour-aday law for bakers and the public welfare. Consequently the task has been to show that there exists to-day-no matter what may have been the common understanding when the New York law was considered-a common understanding that long hours of labor in any industry are înjurious to the public welfare. Case Worked up by L. D. Brandeis. The work of laying this new "" common understanding" before the court was undertaken by Louis D. Brandeis. He worked four months in incorporating it into a brief. His nomination for the Supreme Court bench cut short his activity along this line, and Felix Frankfurter completed it. The combined work consists of extracts from several thousands of scientific papers, addresses, and reports not only in the United States, but throughout the world, and is said to constitute the most exhaustive work ever prepared on the subject. In the first place the lawyers claim that long hours of labor are a menace to national vitality. The stress and strain of the American way of living and working, they declare, is one of the important contributing factors to the extraordinary prevalence of the degenerative diseases-diseases of the heart, blood-vessels, and kidneys. Recent investigations, they state, show that not only in the dangerous trades, but in all industries, a permanent predisposition to disease and premature death exists in the common phenomenon of fatigue and exhaustion. Statistics are produced to show that nervous breakdowns are increasing throughout the world wherever long hours of labor are permitted, and that adults are more susceptible to nervous disorders than young persons. New health hazards are developing in modern industry, the lawyers contend. One of these results from the speeding up of machinery, complicating the processes of manufacture and involving a correspondingly greater physical strain upon the workers. Authorities are quoted to show that the extreme monotony of many branches of industry adds an additional hazard to health, and that the danger is increasing as specialization goes on. The evil, it is said, is intensified by piece work. Still other authorities are quoted to show that the danger of excessive working hours is often unperceived by the worker, and hence he should be protected against himself by the law. Benefit of Short Hours Equal pains are taken to show the benefit of short hours, as well as to point out what the authorities say on the evils of long hours. The first result of short hours, as pointed out by the lawyers, is the growth of temperance where working hours have been reduced. Attention is called by the attorneys to the movement for recreation for alults in cities, and the new opportunities for popular education, as developed in regular night schools, public evening lectures, and courses in the big universities. From the point of view of betterment of citizenship, the attorneys claim the result of shorter hours has been most gratifying. With at least sixteen millions of Americans over ten years of age who were foreign born, the country, it was said, is recognizing that the prime necessity is the Americanization of the immigrant. "Obviously this whole programme of Americanization is impossible," it is said, "unless sufficient leisure is provided after working hours to enable the workers to take advantage of the opportunities offered. task of teaching adult foreigners a language is rendered almost hopeless unless they can come to be taught with some freshness of mind. The project of Americanization is defeated when working hours are so long that no evening leisure is left or the immigrant workers are too much exhausted to make use of it." The new "Re Industrial conditions which result in physi cal degeneration, it is pointed out decrease the military usefulness of a citizen. cruiting statistics from Germany are of most value," it is said, "because they cover the entire male population. They prove the physical superiority of recruits from non-industrial regions. In spite of thirty years of social legislation in Germany, it is apparent that industrial labor, together with the strain of city life, have resulted in the highest percentage of rejections for physical unfitness among the recruits." As to the effect on production, the attorneys cite authorities to show that shorter hours result in a superior output by increasing efficiency. The introduction of the shorter workday, they say, has not led in the long run to an increase in the cost of production, because the labor cost is only one item and often a small item, in the total cost of production, and also because of the heightened efficiency of both employer and employee. Reduction in wages, due to shorter hours, it is claimed, has been only temporary in places where shorter hours have been put into operation. COMPENSATION FOR ONE EYE The industrial commission decided in the case of Lee Duncan against the Cactus Mining company, that only compensation could be allowed for the loss of one eye in the absence of proof that the other eye had been impaired by the injury to the one removed. There was no dispute as to the facts in the loss of the right eye. But Duncan claimed that his other eye was also affected. He was placed under the care of a physician expert in the treatment of the eye whose opinion was TRUST COMPANY HAS SUPERIOR CLAIM Opinion written by Commissioner Frank Burford of the Supreme Court Commission, and approved by the Supreme Court on May 2, reverses the judgment of the Caddo county district court in a case in which the Commerce Trust company of Kansas City is interested to the extent of about $25,000. involved the question of whether the Oklahoma banking department, in taking charge of the Anadarko State bank, insolvent, had a superior claim on notes that had been given by the bank to secure It a loan from the Trust company. The lower court gave the state a judgment against the trust company for the notes, and the high court reverses the action of the lower court. Officals of the bank borrowed $25,000 from the Commerce Trust company and gave notes held by the bank to secure the loan. This was some time before the bank was actually taken over by the banking board. When this action was finally taken the bank commissioner, under the law, took charge of the assets of the bank, and instituted suit to get possession of the notes that had been given to secure the $25,000 loan. The Caddo county district court gave the bank commissioner judgment for the possession of the notes, and the Trust company appealed. The opinion holds that as the transaction in making the loan occurred before the bank was taken over by the commissioner, that the trust company had a superior claim on the notes, MUST PAY LICENSE Automobiles owned by employes of the city, even though they be rented to the city, are not exempt from the usual license imposed by the state, is the opinion from the attorney general's office to the mayor. There are several cars owned by employes of the city, but which are used for the city's business for which rent is paid. The owner of the car is required to pay the license imposed by the state, according to the opinion. |