CHAPTER 17.

BRIDGES.

Section numbers to notes refer to the Revised Statutes of 1914 and sections herein.

SEC.

3781a. Bridge on Ohio river at Evans

ville-Commission.

3781b. Appropriation.

3782. Township building over boundary streams.

SEC.

3821. County bridges, surveys and estimates.

3823a. Township building bridges.

[Acts 1921, p. 382. In force May 31, 1921.]

3781a. Bridge on Ohio river at Evansville-Commission.-1. The governor is hereby authorized and directed to appoint a commission of two members whose duty it shall be to meet and confer with any like commission which may be appointed by the State of Kentucky relative to the erection of an interstate bridge across the Ohio river at the city of Evansville, Indiana. The members of the commission hereby created, in conjunction and co-operation with any similar commission which may be appointed by the State of Kentucky, and with any officers of the United States government who may be assigned to that duty, shall select a suitable site for the location of such proposed interstate bridge, estimate the cost of the construction thereof; make such surveys and calculations as may be deemed necessary; prepare a report embodying their findings, and submit the same to the governor on or before December 1, 1922. The commission is authorized to consult the proper departments of the United States government in the prosecution of its work and to obtain from the United States government such financial or other assistance as it may be enabled to render, and to use all honorable means to secure such federal legislation as may be necessary to enable the State of Indiana and the State of Kentucky to co-operate in the construction and maintenance of an inter-state bridge.

3781b. Appropriation.-2. The sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000) is hereby appropriated to pay any expenses which may be incurred by the commission in carrying on its work. The members of said commission shall serve without compensation.

3782. Townships building over boundary streams.

See note to section 7744.

3821. County bridges, surveys and estimates.

Under this section and section 7687, it is within the discretion of the board of county commissioners whether a bridge shall be built on a county highway. Martin v. Board of Comrs. of Pike County, 65 App. 375, 117 N. E. 517. 3823a. Township building bridges.

See note to section 7774.

BUILDINGS.

Section numbers to notes refer to the Revised Statutes of 1914 and sections herein.

Persons who carry on a business within the meaning of this act, and who do not comply with the provisions of this section as to the construction of fire escapes, may be liable for damages to persons who are injured because of the failure of the owners of a building to provide such escapes, and the sufficiency of a complaint in an action to recover damages is considered. Steiert v. Coulter, 54 App. 643, 102 N. E. 113, 103 N. E. 117.

The limitation by this section of penalties to the persons named, does not confine the civil liability for damages because of a failure to comply with the provisions of the act to the same persons. Steiert v. Coulter, 54 App. 643, 102 N. E. 113, 103 N. E. 117.

3847b. Inspectors' duties.

See note to section 3862d.

[Acts 1919, p. 708. In force March 14, 1919.]

3847c. Building inspection.-1. From and after the passage of this act, it shall be and is hereby made the duty of the building inspector of every city, if there be a building inspector, and if there be no building inspector then of the mayor, and of the township trustee of every township, the board of trustees of every town and the board of commissioners of every county, to inspect or have inspected any building, or anything attached thereto located therein, or connected therewith, which is in the course of erection or repair as defined and set forth in the provisions of this act, to ascertain whether or not the provisions of this act have been, or are being complied with. If it appears upon such inspection that the building or anything attached thereto, or located therein, or connected therewith, is being constructed, erected or repaired, contrary to and in violation of the pro

visions of this act or of the act to which this act is supplemental, such officer, so charged with the duty of inspecting said building, as aforesaid, shall order the same to be remedied and the provisions of this act complied with, and if such notification be not complied with, within reasonable time, he shall prosecute whoever may be responsible for such delinquency and violation.

3847d. Supplemental act.-2. Nothing contained in the provisions of this act shall affect, amend, repeal or alter in any way the present inspection or dangerous occupation laws of this state, except as herein set forth, but this act shall be deemed additional and supplemental thereto.

Section 3 provides that the above act shall be in force and effect from and after its passage.

3862a. Dangerous occupation, regulations.

The act of 1911, providing for the recovery of damages by employes who are injured while engaged in dangerous occupations because of a failure of employers to comply with the statute regulating the duties of such employers, does not render the owner of a building liable for an injury to an employe who is employed by a contractor engaged in the construction of the building when such owner has no control over the manner in which the work is to be performed, and the contractor has the entire charge of the work and the workmen engaged therein. Leet v. Block, 182 Ind. 271, 106 N. E. 373; Switow v. McDougal, 184 Ind. 259, 111 N. E. 3.

If a building falls or collapses, and persons are injured thereby, actions to recover damages for such injuries are not governed by the act of 1911 regulating the duties of employers who engage persons to work in dangerous occupations. Prest-O-Lite Co. v. Skeel, 182 Ind. 593, 106 N. E. 365.

Under this section and section 3862d, where an employe of an independent contractor was injured by the breaking of a scaffold, it was held that the owner was not liable, since the statute does not abrogate the common-law rule as to negligence of independent contractors. Switow v. McDougal, 184 Ind. 259; 111 N. E. 3.

Under this section and section 3862d, where the defendant was the employer or contractor conducting the operation of a store front, he was conducting a dangerous occupation which imposed upon him the duty of seeing that all scaffolding was carefully selected, inspected and tested, such duty not resting upon the employe working on the scaffold. Kawneer Mfg. Co. v. Kalter, 187 Ind. 99, 118 N. E. 561.

3862b. Three-story building, protections.

Persons who are engaged in the erection of buildings, and who fail to comply with the provisions of this section as to laying temporary floors, may be liable to persons for damages who are injured because of the absence of such flooring. Suelzer v. Carpenter, 183 Ind. 23. 107 N. E. 467.

3862d. Materials, safeguards.

If the owner of property employs a contractor to perform work in relation to the construction of a building, and such owner has no control over the manner in which the work is to be performed, such is not liable for injuries to employes engaged by such contractor to perform the work caused by the falling of a

scaffold erected by order of the contractor. Switow v. McDougal, 184 Ind. 259, 111 N. E. 3.

See note to section 3862a.

A hotel manager who employed plaintiff to test a fire escape required by this section was held not liable for injuries suffered by reason, of the breaking of the fire escape under sections 3841, 3847b. McGee v. Stockton, 62 App. 555, 113 N. E. 388.

A complaint under this section need not aver that defendant employed more than five persons. Goshen Milling Co. v. Bailey, 186 Ind. 377, 114 N. E. 869.

Under this section and sections 8020b, 8020c, relating to scaffolds and contributory negligence, where an employe was injured because of his employer's negligence in furnishing a defective scaffold, recovery is not defeated by the fact that the employe knew, or in the exercise of ordinary care could have known, of the unsafe condition of the scaffold. Kawneer Mfg. Co. v. Kalter, 187 Ind. 99, 118 N. E. 561.

In an action under this section, question of negligence in failure to furnish goggles to employe is for the jury. Emerson-Brantingham Co. v. Crowe, App., 125 N. E. 223.

Under this section every device, care and precaution consistent with the reasonable efficiency of work or machinery must be used to protect life, limb or health by those having charge of such work or machinery. Ayrshire Coal Co. v. Wilder, App. 129 N. E. 260.

The above section being general does no more than declare the common-law and has no effect in determining liability. Cleveland, C., C & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Ropp, Ind.

129 N. E. 475.