been seconded. It is now twenty minutes to twelve, and unless there is objection, the motion may lay over in its present form. MR. DAN FRASER, of Fowler: I think we are all ready to vote on that. PRESIDENT PARKER: There ought to be some further dis cussion. MR. L. B. EWBANK, of Indianapolis: It is only a motion for a committee. PRESIDENT PARKER: Wouldn't it be better to let it lay over, because it presents opportunity for further remarks. MR. ADDISON C. HARRIS, of Indianapolis: I hope the Association will discuss it thoroughly. PRESIDENT PARKER: I am sure there are some who wish to speak on the motion. I think Mr. Dye should speak on it. MR. A. C. HARRIS: He understands it, if he can be provoked to speak. TREASURER GAVIN: I don't think that this Association ought to take even its temporary adjournment over the noon hour without a very cordial and hearty expression of our appreciation of the very interesting, able and eloquent address given to us by Mr. Gregory. (Applause.) He has presented a phase of a very interesting question, which to many of us, I am sure, will be novel and new. It is an interesting bit of history which has been brought out with it, and I am sure it has delighted all of us to hear it, and especially I think we ought to all express our hearty co-operation and appreciation of the optimistic view expressed by the speaker of the future of this nation, of the ability of this country, this people, rightly to manage its affairs in the future and promote the general welfare of our people. (Applause.) PRESIDENT PARKER: The chair will entertain a motion. TREASURER GAVIN: I therefore move you that this Association do express its very cordial, sincere and earnest appreciation of the able, interesting and eloquent address that was delivered to us by Judge Gregory, and to thank him most heartily for his presence with us. (Seconded and carried unanimously.) MR. L. B. EWBANK, of Indianapolis: While we are expressing appreciation, and I appreciate all that has been said and done by each and every one, I think at the same time that we ought to express our high appreciation of South Bend and its people, and the courtesy and hospitality shown to us. Of course, I do not know how the rest of the Association has fared, but I can say for myself that I could not possibly have enjoyed meeting people more than I have those of South Bend; I could not possibly appreciate a city more than I do South Bend; I could not possibly have received greater courtesy and hospitality than I have in South Bend; and I move you that we express our most hearty appreciation of the city of South Bend, its people, and the courtesy and hospitality that have been shown us. (Seconded and carried unanimously.) PRESIDENT PARKER: I have two announcements to make, and then we will take a recess. Let me ask you, gentlemen, to be promptly here at 2 o'clock. Judge Cox will begin his address at that time. These are the announcements: The young men (speaking as the Indians do) of Indianapolis, challenged the young men of the Bar of St. Joseph County to play a game of ball this afternoon. That game is scheduled to take place at Spring Brook Park, a couple of miles east of here. Cars start from the station down here, and anybody who wants to go, I imagine they will have a good time and will be welcome, that is certain. It is supposed to come off, beginning about 4:15, which will give you time enough to get out. The other announcement I make because of a misunderstanding, and that is, the banquet tonight will begin at 7 o'clock, not 7:30 as was announced yesterday, and for the benefit of those who came in this morning and were not here yesterday, it has been decided that while no man will be thrown out if he appears in a dress suit, it is not necessary that he should appear in a dress suit. It is a matter of "local option." TREASURER GAVIN: I just want to ask that all those who have not registered will stop after adjournment and register now. It is desired that this register be as complete as possible, not only that we may have a historical and authoritative record of the attendance, but it is also desirable that the dinner committee may have as accurate information as possible of the number who are here, in order that we may properly arrange for the dinner this evening, and Mr. Batchelor needs it for his purposes. It is needed in order that you may be properly entertained, in the first place, and it is needed in the next place in order that we may not order too much and have to pay for what we do not receive; so, those who have not registered, take time enough after this adjournment to come up and register. It can all be done in a few minutes. Whereupon, at 12 o'clock noon, the meeting adjourned, to reconvene at 2:00 o'clock p. m. SECOND DAY-AFTERNOON SESSION. SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, THURSDAY, JULY 11, 1912, The meeting reconvened at 2:00 o'clock p. m., pursuant to adjournment; President Parker in the chair. SECRETARY BATCHELOR: The Secretary desires to announce he has an unlimited supply of the report of the Special Committee, and if any member wants a copy he will find them here. PRESIDENT PARKER: Now, gentlemen, the next exercise is a paper on "Old Ways or Uncertain Seas," by Hon. Charles E. Cox, of Indianapolis, present Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of Indiana. (Judge Cox's paper will be found on page 293 of these proceedings.) PRESIDENT PARKER: For a few minutes we will revert to the business left over from the forenoon-the discussion of the report of the Committee on Employers' Liability and Workmen's Compensation Laws.. MR. JOHN T. DYE, of Indianapolis: Very briefly I will add to what the chairman of the committee has said to you upon this question. It is a grave question, and the more you consider it the graver it will appear. Our industrial system is a great change from what existed before it grew up, and there seems to be a pressing demand for some change in the law. The literature upon the subject is large, but when we come to look at the various plans which have been suggested we are confronted with difficulty. The plan of a compulsory compensation law, where the schedule to be paid to employes who have suffered from accident is fixed by the Legislature and paid by the employer, or by a commission, has been adopted in some instances. Various modifications of the plan have been adopted in various places, but we are confronted with the difficulty at the outset that we cannot take from the employe the right of action for a wrongful act or tortuous act of the employer and commit him to the Legislature for an adjustment of a question which is really of a judicial character. When an employe suffers an injury by a wrongful act which destroys his earning capacity, he has a right to relief in the courts now. The question arises, which the courts will have to decide, whether he can be deprived of that right. In the next place, if he can be deprived of that right, would it be wise or prudent or discreet to attempt to exercise that power? What would be the result of it? You transfer to the legislative halls the settlement of questions that are now judicial controversies between employers and employes and decided by independent courts and impartial juries; you fix a schedule by which the rights of the employe and the employer are fixed. Of course, one party wants to raise that schedule and the other to lower it, and you start a strife between classes which will be fruitful of evil results. The results cannot be anticipated. The party that might have the majority in the Legislature settles the rule by legislative enactment instead of by the decision of the courts. Now, what can be done? It is, to say the least, very doubtful whether any compulsory law depriving the employer and the employe of the freedom of contract about their important affairs-depriving employes (and there are millions of them), of their right to go into court-creating a caste in the community-would stand under our organic law, or under our established methods of business, and if it would stand, it would be as the judge said, using the phrases with which he criticised it, a sort of political atavism; it would |