456 TWENTY-THIRD ANNUAL YEAR BOOK— PART VII 



This is the exact opposite of the custom followed in the past, as the 

 burden of proof was always upon the carrier to show that it was not care- 

 less or negligent in the handling of the live stock in transit, and unless 

 the carrier could prove this, it invariably lost the suit. But under this 

 new order of things, it places the shipper at a very great disadvantage in 

 collecting his damage claims. Especially is this true of the shipper who 

 does not accompany his stock to market, as it would be very difficult 

 for him to prove gross negligence in the handling of his stock while in 

 transit. This, then, being true, your association should take immediate 

 steps to have the laws properly clarified on this matter during the coming 

 session of the state legislature. 



I want to digress just a moment on this question. This situation was 

 brought very forcibly to my attention during the summer. When some 

 of our local lawyers there were trying out a case in our district court, 

 the judge took the case from the jury before it was near through and 

 instructed a decision for the carriers in the case, on the ground that the 

 complainant in the case — the shippers — had not shown that the railroads 

 were careless or negligent in the shipment. Of course you men know as 

 well as I do, that for the man who does not accompany his stock, that is 

 a physical impossibility. He doesn't know anything about how the rail- 

 road handles his stock, so that it would either force every man to accom- 

 pany his stock and never go to sleep while he was on that trip, and be 

 on the job every minute, or else he doesn't stand any show whatever;, 

 if he has dead or crippled animals in the shipment while in transit, in 

 the securing or collecting of damage claims on those animals. I think 

 there have been about three decisions rendered by our Iowa courts in 

 cases of this kind, where they have practically held that it was up to 

 the shipper to prove gross negligence on the part of the railroad in the 

 handling of the stock, in order that they might secure damages, and for 

 that reason, I might add, there is no question but what the railroads are 

 being relieved of large numbers of claims; that they are refusing tot 

 pay them because they know the shipper won't sue on them, because the 

 shipper knows he would stand a poor showing in an attempt to collect. 



So it seems to me, in the present session of the legislature that this 

 law should be clarified and see where we are at and see that a shipper 

 will stand on an equal footing with the railroads in securing justice in 

 the courts. 



Taxes 



The question of exorbitant taxes is still with us, and farmers every- 

 where are almost driven to acts of desperation to secure money with 

 which to pay their taxes, and still the burden continues to increase. I 

 went into this question at length in my last annual address, so I do not 

 wish to repeat, but rather to emphasize what I said then, and I feel that 

 a strong resolution should be adopted demanding retrenchment and re- 

 form in the spending of our public funds by our county, state and federal 

 officials, and that this be followed up by your association joining forces 

 with other farm organizations to bring about a more sane and equitable 

 method of taxation, during the coming winter. 



In this connection, I wish to call your attention to the importance of 



