Brown

In denying the petition for rehearing it need hardly be said that neither in the decision nor in the opinion filed herein did this court refuse to follow the construction placed by the Supreme Court of Washington upon a statute of the state. In none of the decisions of the Supreme Court of that state reférred to by counsel do we understand the court to have held that the amended statute of the state found in section 7381 of Rem. & Bal. Code makes of such an emi-ployé as Righi in the present case the representative of the master. On the contrary, that court in the late case of Delaski et al. v. Northwestern Improvement Co., 61 Wash. 255 , 112 Pac. 341 , decided December 16, 1910, distinctly adjudged that the state statute is the measure of the company’s duty. The statute of the state of 1891 (Laws of 1891, c. 81, § 9) expressly required every coal mine in the state to be kept “free from standing powder smoke and gases of every kind,” which the Supreme Court of the state held, and, as we said in the opin *256 ion heretofore filed herein, imposed upon the operator thereof the imperative duty of complying with that law. But the Legislature of the state saw fit to modify that statute…