1914. 
THE KURAL NEW-YORKER 
121 
WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION IN CON¬ 
NECTICUT. 
If my hired man gets hurt, while he is actually 
working for me, I have to settle his doctor’s bill, and 
pay him half wages for the time he is laid up. That 
is Connecticut’s new Workmen’s Compensation Law 
in a nutshell. Of course there are explanations and 
exceptions. The employer is not obliged to furnish 
a doctor after 30 days. The compensation pay¬ 
ments actually begin with the third week of dis¬ 
ability. The amount must he at least $5 per week, 
but cannot exceed $10. For total disability the 
weekly payments run 10 years; for lesser injuries 
and for death, in accordance with an elaborate 
schedule contained in the act. 
To appreciate the status of the farmer under this 
iaw, it is necessary first to consider the influences 
that brought about its passage. Workmen’s compen¬ 
sation is primarily a development of the ancient 
common law principle, that the master is bound to 
provide safe conditions under which the servant 
may work. Heretofore, however, the servant was 
never supposed to recover damages for injuries re¬ 
sulting from his own carelessness. In the olden 
days, when the common law was being formulated 
by the judges of England, workingmen could not 
vote, and therefore had little or no political in¬ 
fluence. As a natural consequence, the obligation 
of the master to safeguard the life and limbs of 
his servants was reduced to a minimum by two 
famous decisions. One of these laid down the princi¬ 
ple that any man who went to work on a dangerous 
job, thereby assumed the risk of injury. The other 
held that no man could recover from his employer 
l’or injuries caused by the act or negligence of a 
fellow servant. These English decisions were after¬ 
wards cited as precedents in American courts, and 
receiving judicial approval, promptly became the 
law of the land. 
When these decisions were first made in England, 
it is not likely that hardship to more than a very 
few individuals was involved. The trouble came 
in with the evolution of industry and the develop¬ 
ment of the factory system. The advent of the 
corporation did away with the old personal rela¬ 
tions between master and servant. At the same 
time, the protection afforded by the doctrine of as¬ 
sumed risk and the fellow servant rule, made many 
employers seemingly indifferent to the physical wel¬ 
fare of their employees. 
The situation in Connecticut up to 1011. was 
aggravated by a system of legalized court pro¬ 
cedure, which kept the injured party from getting 
his case tried before a jury. The defendant em¬ 
ployer had only to make a technical default by ad¬ 
mitting to the court his liability for damages. The 
amount payable was then fixed by the judge, after 
listening to the evidence on that point. In this 
way the element of sympathy, often a large factor 
in verdicts rendered by a jury, was pretty thor¬ 
oughly eliminated. Agitation for radical changes 
in these Connecticut laws began in earnest about 
live years ago. Public opinion was thus developed 
to a point where the Compensation Law passed the 
Legislature almost unanimously. The act, when 
passed, was not supposed to affect ordinary farmers 
or householders. Exemption was provided for all 
those employing less than five hands. The Attorney 
General, however, has recently ruled that the small 
employers who desire exemption must claim it by 
filing papers with the Compensation Commissioner, 
and giving written notice to their employees. The 
blank forms for these notices may be obtained from 
the town clerks, who can also give rhe name and 
address for the Compensation Commissioner of his 
district. There are five of these Commissioners 
appointed by the Governor to administer the details 
of the Compensation Law, and see that the injured 
workmen get their just dues. 
The farmer is, in theory, entitled to retain the 
old common law defenses (contributory negligence, 
assumed risk and the fellow servant rule) against 
personal injury suits. Whether that privilege is 
worth anything now is to say the least doubtful. 
The law has been changed so that any man can have 
his case tried before a jury. Meanwhile public 
opinion has so turned against the old common law 
defenses, that an ordinary jury would be apt to 
ignore them, at least to some extent. In doubtful 
cases, the chances would be mostly in favor of the 
injured man. which fact will make claimants under 
the old law the more ready to bring suit. 
Fortunately for the Connecticut farmers, the in¬ 
surance companies are offering them policies which 
cover all their obligations under the Compensation 
Law, for around $10 per year. The doctor’s bills, 
weekly payments, funeral expenses and the costs of 
settling claims or defending suits, will all be taken 
care of for the sum named. 1 understand that the 
farmers of this vicinity are taking out these poli¬ 
cies very generally. Personally I would not think 
of doing otherwise. I could not serve my hired 
man with a non-compensation notice without caus¬ 
ing a feeling that would be more costly to my busi¬ 
ness than the* policy. Also I am satisfied that the 
better class of farm hands will avoid the employer 
who is not prepared to allow them the benefits of 
the Compensation Law. c. h. g. 
Hartford, Conn. 
FARMERS AND THE INCOME TAX. 
I want information as to how a farmer should figure 
out his income that comes under the new income tax 
law. I should like to know what should be done in 
regard to products grown in 11)12 and still on hand 
March 1. 1913? I should also like to know what 
should be done in regard to crops grown in 2913 
and on hand January 1, 11)14, or shipped on com¬ 
mission and no account sales received on or before 
January 1 for goods shipped the latter part of Decem¬ 
ber? I should also like to know whether the cost of 
setting out new orchard, laying tile drain, building 
fences, cleaning and putting under cultivation new 
land should be figured as expense or put under the 
head of permanent improvements? II. 
Products grown in 1912 and still on hand March 
I, 1913. may be inventoried as of March 1. 1913, at 
their supposed value, or they may be disregarded 
entirely. The latter is iweferable. Crops grown 
in 1913 and still on hand January 1, 1914, or in 
hands of commission men or no account sales re¬ 
ceived should be inventoried at their supposed value. 
If disposed of before the “return” has gone to the 
Revenue Collector on or before March 1, the return 
may be corrected. The cost of setting out new 
orchard, laying new tile drain, clearing and putting 
under cultivation new land should be charged to 
permanent improvements. If the fence built is 
around the new land that should also he charged 
to permanent improvement. However, if the tile 
drain is work of taking up an old drain and re¬ 
placing with new of same size, it should he charged 
to operating expenses. If a new fence is built in 
a new place anywhere (except for temporary pur¬ 
poses) charge it to permanent improvements. Re¬ 
pairs to old equipment or a structure of any kind, 
building; fence, drain, orchard, tool, etc., should 
be charged to operating expenses. A new structure 
of any kind in a new place should be charged to 
permanent improvements. When an old structure 
is replaced by a new one in the same place and the 
new structure is of the same size and character 
as the old, merely replacing it “in kind” it should 
he charged to operating expenses. But if the new 
structure replacing the old one is of a better charac¬ 
ter than the old one. the excess value of the new 
one over the old should be charged to improvements. 
For example, a woven wire fence may replace a 
hoard fence. The board fence may cost 29 cents 
per rod and the wire fence 30 cents per rod. 
Charge the 20 cents per rod to operating expenses 
and the 10 cents per rod to improvements. 
A BRIEF REVIEW OF THE INCOME TAX.— 
The Federal income tax law is part of the new 
T'nderwood-Simmons tariff law passed October 3, 
1913. This law reduced import rates on many arti¬ 
cles and placed other articles on the free list. These 
reductions would lessen the revenue of the govern¬ 
ment, and the income tax is to offset the loss. The 
law reads: "That there shall be levied, assessed, 
collected and paid annually upon the entire net 
income arising and accruing from all sources in the 
preceding calendar year fo every citizen of the 
United States, whether residing at home or abroad, 
and to every person residing in tsie United States, 
though not a citizen thereof, a tax of one per 
centum per annum upon such income, except as 
hereinafter provided; and a like tax shall be as¬ 
sessed, levied, collected and paid annually upon 
the entire net income from all property owned and 
cT every business, trade or profession carried on in 
the United States by persons residing elsewhere.” 
The “foreigner” helps us pay our National tax. 
This tax of one per cent, is called the “normal” 
tax and is paid by corporations as well as by indi¬ 
viduals. It takes the place of the Corporation tax 
of the Payne-Aldrich law. 
DEDUCTIONS FROM GROSS INCOME.—"In 
computing net income for the purpose of the normal 
tax there shall be allowed as deductions: First, 
tlie necessary expenses actually paid in carrying on 
any business, not including personal living or 
family expenses; second, all interest paid within 
the year by a taxable person on indebtedness; 
third, national, State, county, school, and municipal 
taxes paid within the year, not including those 
assessed against local benefits; fourth, losses actu¬ 
ally sustained during the year, Incurred in trade 
or arising from fire, storms, or shipwreck, and not 
compensated for by insurance or otherwise; fifth, 
debts due to the taxpayer actually ascertained to he 
worthless and charged oft' within the year; sixth. 
a reasonable allowance for the exhaustion, wear 
and tear of property arising out of its use or em¬ 
ployment in the business, but no deduction shall be 
made for any amount of expense of restoring 
property or making good the exhaustion thereof 
for which an allowance is or has been made: Pro¬ 
vided, that no deduction shall be allowed for any 
amount paid out for new buildings, permanent im¬ 
provements, or betterments, made to increase the 
value of any property or estate; seventh, the amount 
received as dividends upon the stock or from t~ie 
net earnings of any corporation, joint stock com¬ 
pany, association, or insurance company which is 
taxable upon its net income; eighth, the amount of 
income, the tax upon which has been paid or with¬ 
held for payment at the source of the income.” 
Money or other things of value, disposed of by 
gift, donation, or endowment shall not be deducted 
from the income. Also there shall be excluded from 
the income the interest on the onligations of the 
United States and its possessions and of any State 
or subdivision of a State. The aoove deductions 
apply to individuals and corporations. 
EXEMPTIONS.—There is an exemption of .$3,000 
from the income of an individual making a "return,” 
plus $1,000 additional if the return is that of a 
married man or woman. If the husband and wife 
each have an income exceeding $3,000 they can chiim 
but one exemption, unless they are living apart 
permanently, and then each may claim the $3,000 
exemption. Salaries paid by a State or any sub¬ 
division of a State are exempt also. Salaries paid 
by the United States are not exempt except that 
paid to the present President and the judges of the 
Supreme and Federal courts now in office. The 
Senators and Representatives and Vice-President 
pay the income tax. 
ADDITIONAL INCOME TAX.—On incomes exceed¬ 
ing $20,000 a year the following “additional” income 
tax is levied and collected: $20,000 and not exceed¬ 
ing $50,000, 1%; $50,000 to $75,000, 2% ; $75,000 to 
$100,000, 3% ; $100,000 to $250,000, 4% ; $250,000 to 
$500,000, 5%; above $500,000, 6%. 
Who makes a “return” or statement of net in¬ 
come? Everyone with a net income of $3,000 or 
more, even when the exemption is $4,000 or more. 
The “return” is for the full calendar year except 
for 1913, it is for 10 months only from March 1st 
to December 31st inclusive. Five-sixths of the de¬ 
ductions and exemptions for a year are allowed. If 
part of one's income exceeding $3,000 is regular and 
paid in the form of salary or interest on bonds total¬ 
ing over $3,000 a year it is to be withheld at the 
“source,” and the one making the “return” must 
notify the “source” by February 1st that he claims 
liis exemption. The "return” must he delivered to 
the Revenue Collector March 1st. lie has until 
June 1st to verify and correct it and notify the tax- 
layer and the tax must be paid in June on penalty 
of 5% added and 1% a month till paid. The person 
paying must send the tax to the Collector instead of 
the Collector coming for it. The “return” must be 
made under oath. 
Gains arising from the increased value of real 
estate are to he included in this tax. Take for illus¬ 
tration a purchase of a farm for $10,000 in 1913 
after March 1st and sold three years later at $13,- 
000. The gain of $3,000 is a gain to be returned in 
the year ending Dec. 31st, 1916, at 1% of tax, or it 
may be prorated over three years, $1,000 for each 
year if the taxpayer desires. If the property is 
purchased previous to March 1st, 1913, the increase 
may be prorated over the whole period and is tax¬ 
able only on the prorate gain for the time the law 
lias been in force. 
This tax will call for some knowledge of book¬ 
keeping. Every farmer should keep an accurate 
account of the farm operations. lie should know 
what every crop costs to produce and market. lie 
should know what every field is producing and the 
cost. lie should know what every animal in his 
herd is making in profits (if he is a dairy farmer 
and is aiming at the best results). Some of our 
large factories know to the fraction of a cent what 
every article produced costs when finished. The 
income tax law may be worth all it costs to our 
farmers if it compels an accurate account of farm 
operations. The Sixteenth Amendment to the Con¬ 
stitution seems to indicate a purpose to gather a 
part of the Federal revenues from incomes. A fair 
trial of the law is now expected. There is a penalty 
of front, $20 to $1,000 for neglecting or refusing to 
make a return. Corporations are tineable $10,000. 
f. N. c. 
We find a big demand for seed potatoes which have 
been certified by the Department of Agriculture as true 
and clean. There is a good chance fur careful men to 
enter the business of producing such seed. 
