Two points have occurred to me which I would like to ask you to consider. It is worthy of note that during my reign there have been brought to my attention many striking cases in which laboring women have been killed through accidents with machinery. I receive regularly from the Minister of Justice tabulated lists of requests[6] for pardon, and it seems to me that there is among them a striking number of cases of women farmhands who have met with accidents in tending machines. As has already been said, I am not granting these pardons as freely as formerly. It is to be noted, furthermore, that a great difference prevails in the adjudication of the cases in which penalties may be inflicted and in the penalties themselves. I next inquired why these women workers--it was especially girls working with the thrashing-machines--were killed, and it usually appeared that the girls were caught by their dresses in the transmission pulleys and so became entangled in them. Then I asked if there were no means of protection there. Yes, indeed, they said, according to the police regulations the pulleys must have a cover or a box must be put over them, but in each of these cases this had not been attended to. There also appeared here, on the one side, a certain indifference either on the part of the owner or of the person who was conducting the work concerning the life of the women in his employ and, on the other side, an indifference on the part of the women themselves, who had become accustomed to working near the moving parts of the machines and to stepping over the pulleys, and finally the accident happened. Therefore, may I ask you that in using the word "machines" these provisions regarding power transmission be not forgotten. Many of the machines stand in one place and the apparatus for transmission is in another place or in the yard, and that is a chief cause of the accidents. For every one passes through the yard, and especially if there are children playing there, all too easily some misfortune may occur. [6] From employers, of course. Let me, therefore, remark, concerning what one of the preceding speakers has said, that I myself have come to the same conclusion as Professor Schmoller. I believe that it is not sufficient that the state should lay upon the worker the obligation to be careful and that it should give him directions how to conduct himself with regard to the machines. This cannot be carried out.