Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1918 [PAGE 132]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

128

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

[October l8,

to apply to such a set of facts. The University was chartered to furnish instruction to students in various branches of learning. Neither the general nature and character of the work of educational instruction, nor the methods adopted in giving it, can properly be denominated "enterprise" as that term is usually defined. (Uphoff case supra). Nor would they be brought within the definition of that term as employed in the statute merely by the incidental use and handling of the materials mentioned in the statute. Were it otherwise and appellant deemed an employer as defined in section 4, then each employee of the University, no matter how remote his employment from the use or handling of such materials, would be brought within the scope of the act, a construction we cannot regard as within its meaning and intent. The authorities cited in the argument relate to very different situations, and throw so little light on the construction of Section 3, that we shall not discuss them, nor dwell upon the many incongruities the different interpretations would produce. Reaching the conclusion, therefore, that mere methods of instruction in an educational institution involving the use of such materials cannot be deemed as embraced within the term "enterprise" as used in said act, and that the facts disclosed in the proceedings before the Industrial Board did not give it jurisdiction to render a decision and make such award against appellant, we shall reverse the action of the court below in dismissing the petition and quashing the writ and shall enter the order here that should have been entered in the hearing before the Circuit Court and set aside proceedings and quash the record of the Industrial Board relating thereto. (Behrens v. Commission of Highways 169 111. 559). Appellee contends that the order of the Circuit Court allowing the evidence and proceedings before the Industrial Board to be incorporated in this bill of exceptions is of no effect because the bill of exceptions was not filed within time and the court had lost jurisdiction to enter the order. But as appellee subsequently stipulated that the bill of exceptions might be incorporated into the transcript of the record for this bill, he is in no position to raise the point. (Lilderbrand v. Pickrell, 167 111. 624). REVERSED AND RECORD OF INDUSTRIAL BOARD QUASHED.

This decision was received for record.

M I L I T A R Y INSTRUCTION—GENERAL ORDER 49

(14) General Order 49 from the War Department concerning the military organizations at colleges and universities under the provisions of the law passed on June 3, 1016. Attention is called to the fact that there are many different points involved in transferring the form of organization from that which we have had hitherto to the proposed new form described as the Reserve Officers' Training Corps. Applying for the organization of these units of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps implies on the part of the University a willingness to expend considerable money in putting its military service on a more satisfactory basis. Among other things it will have to