The history of the existing mortgage upon the Equitable Building is well known to the public. Early in 1912 the home office building of the society was completely destroyed by fire, leaving the ownership of the site on which the present building is located in the society, and carried upon its books at a valuation of approximately $13,500,000, the assessed valuation being $12,000,000. The society received no revenue from this land and losses thereon through payment of large amounts in taxes were rapidly accumu lating. There was no way by which the property could ever have been made income producing except by the erection of a modern office building. The society was not in a position to assume such a gigantic undertaking. A serious problem was thereby presented, and after considering various proposals the society in August, 1912, entered into an agreement with the Equitable Office Building Corporation, which was subsequently modified, whereby the Building Corporation agreed to purchase of the society the site at $13,500,000 and erect thereon a building to cost approximately an amount equal to the valuation of the site, conditioned that the society loan to the Building Corporation $7,000,000, which, together with the amount of the purchase price, was to be secured by a first mortgage upon the premises and the building when completed. The actual aggregate cost of the building exceeded $14,500,000. Thus the present Equitable mortgage came into existence. If the plan now proposed is carried out, the society will be enabled to retire 564 of the 1,000 shares of capital stock and will realize interest at 3.90 per cent per annum upon its mortgage investment, the greater part of which is the value of the site, which, after the fire in 1912, was absolutely nonproductive.

It is doubtful if any future proposition for the acquisition of the majority of the capital stock will contain so many favorable advantages to the society and its policyholders as the present plan.

Believing as I do, for reasons above stated, that the majority stock is more valuable than the minority shares, I am of the opinion that the minority stockholders are receiving absolutely fair and liberal treatment under the plan. They have the right to offer, within a period of ninety days, their stock for sale at a price

considerably in excess of its actual investment value. In recog nition of the principle that the State, except under the right of eminent domain, cannot compel a person to part with his property at a compensation which he is unwilling to accept, the plan affords each stockholder the opportunity to dispose of his stock, if he so desires, at a more than reasonable price. Although, by acquisition of the majority stock, the policyholders through the intervention of the trustees can control the society's management, still it is desirable that the entire stock be ultimately acquired. It must be conceded that unless the controlling interest of the capital stock is retired or its voting power permanently vested in trust for the benefit of the policyholders it will always be subject to speculation and sale. Public confidence is more or less disturbed by each transfer, for fear the purchaser is acquiring control for self-aggrandizement or some ulterior purpose not for the publie good. Such a sale does immeasurable harm to the business of the society, and thereby indirectly affects the security of its policyholders.

The movement for mutualization of the Equitable began in 1909. Efforts to accomplish that result have been made from time to time without success. There is now presented a plan for mutualization of the society upon a most favorable basis, which, if approved and carried out, will result in no material depreciation of the surplus and will secure to its policyholders for all time the absolute right to choose the directors, and thus maintain control. The society thereby will be enabled to enter upon a new era of progress, with its position materially strengthened and its further activities and accomplishments inuring not only to the benefit of present but future policyholders. The plan is hereby approved.

STATE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

In the Matter of the Claim of HUBERT HENRY OBERLE, for Compensation Under the Workmen's Compensation Law, against ATLANTIC TRANSPORT LINE, Employer and SelfInsurer

File No. 36985

(Decided January 14, 1918)

Injuries sustained by Hubert Henry Oberle while employed as a tallyman by the Atlantic Transport Line in New York city.

The claimant, while employed by the Atlantic Transport Line as a tallyman at Pier 58, North river, in the city of New York, and while delivering a load to the public store, on March 28, 1916, was hit on the left knee by the truck which he was handling, injuring his left leg, affecting the knee-joint and shortening the leg. His injuries disabled him until November 21, 1917, and on that date he was still disabled. His average weekly wage was the sum of seventeen dollars and thirty-one cents. The employer, having acquiesced in the award, is held to be estopped from raising any question in respect to the jurisdiction of the Commission herein. An award was made.

On March 28, 1916, Hubert Henry Oberle sustained injuries as hereinafter set forth. On July 22, 1916, he duly filed a claim for compensation with this Commission, which claim contained an assignment to the employer and self-insurer of any and all rights of said claimant against any person, firm or corporation in consequence of the injuries sustained by Hubert Henry Oberle. By letter dated August 14, 1916, the attorneys for the employer objected to the jurisdiction of this Commission on the ground that the claimant herein was at the time of the injury employed as a tallyman, which was not a person engaged in one of the hazardous employments enumerated in section 2 of the Compensation Law. Thereafter, awards of compensation were duly made by this Commission, beginning on September 19, 1916, and covering the period of disability which began on April 19, 1916. The em

[Vol. 15]

State Industrial Commission

ployer and self-insurer acquiesced in and paid said awards up to and including September, 1917, being in all $850. The awards were as follows: September 19, 1916, October 10, 1916, November 28, 1916, December 8, 1916, April 13, 1917, and September 25, 1917. In each instance notice of said award was duly mailed to all parties pursuant to sections 20 and 23 of the Compensation Law. On October 2, 1917, notice of the award of September 25, 1917, was duly mailed to all parties. None of the above mentioned awards were appealed from. On November 20, 1917, an award was duly made for the period of thirty-two weeks beginning on September 26, 1917 and ending on November 21, 1917, and from this award the employer has appealed, although at the hearing held on November 20, 1917, the representative of the employer admitted that the claimant was then still unable to work.

Hearings were held herein on September 19, 1916, October 10, 1916, November 28, 1916, December 8, 1916, April 3, 1917, May 29, 1917, June 12, 1917, June 26, 1917, September 25, 1917, and November 20, 1917. Hearings were also held on December 21, 1917, January 7, 1918, and January 14, 1918, and the testimony taken at the last hearings ordered to be made part of the record herein.

Robert W. Bonynge, counsel to State Industrial Commission.

Kirlin, Woolsey & Hickox, attorneys for employer and selfinsurer.

BY THE COMMISSION.-All the evidence submitted before the Commission having been heard and duly considered, the Commission makes its conclusion of fact, ruling of law, award and decision as follows:

On March 28, 1916, the day when Hubert Henry Oberle received his injuries, he resided at No. 1123 Washington street, Hoboken, N. J., and was employed by Atlantic Transport Line, engaged in moving or handling cargoes or parts of cargoes of grain, coal, ore, freight, general merchandise, lumber or other

State Industrial Commission

[Vol. 15]

products or materials on docks, platforms and places. Hubert Henry Oberle was employed as a checker or tallyman.

On said date Hubert Henry Oberle was working for his em ployer and while engaged in the regular course of his employment and while on pier 58, North river, New York city, while delivering a load to the public store, he was hit on the side of his left knee with the handle of the truck, and sustained injuries to his left leg which resulted in a marked enlargement as well as marked limited immobility of the knee-joint, and in a marked shortening of the leg, which injuries disabled him from the date of said accident to November 21, 1917, and on that date he was still disabled.

The average weekly wage of Hubert Henry Oberle was the sum of seventeen dollars and thirty-one cents.

It does not appear whether written notice of injury was given to the employer within ten days after disability, but the employer was aware of the accident at the time of the happening thereof and provided medical attention immediately, as appears from the Employer's First Report of Injury. Therefore, the employer and self-insurer was not prejudiced by the failure, if any, to give written notice of injury within ten days after disability.

The assignment to the employer and self-insurer of any and all rights of the claimant against any person, firm or corporation in consequence of the injuries sustained by him, and which said assignment is contained in the employee's claim for compensation filed herein on July 22, 1916, constitutes a valid consideration running to the employer and self-insurer for the acceptance by the claimant of the Commission's awards herein.

At the hearing held on November 20, 1917, the representative of the employer and self-insurer admitted that the claimant herein was still unable to work.

Award of compensation is hereby made against Atlantic Transport Line, employer and self-insurer, to Hubert Henry Oberle, injured employee, at the rate of eleven dollars and fifty-four cents per week for a period of 32 weeks from September 26, 1917, to November 21, 1917, and this claim is hereby continued for further hearing.