4. Another rule should be mentioned that is daily applied. "Not-
withstanding the general rule that the master is bound to furnish
safe and sound materials, machinery, etc., yet if the work upon
which the servant is employed consists in whole or in part, in
handling unsafe or unsound things, known to him to be so, and
which, by the very nature of the business, must be handled while in
that condition, the servant assumes the risk for doing so. Thus,
a railway servant, employed to removed damaged cars to a repair
shop, has no right to complain of injuries suffered from the known
defects of such cars. And where a business is obviously danger-
ous, and is conducted in a manner which is fully known to the
servant at the outset, he assumes the risk of its conduct in that
manner, although a safer method could have been adopted." (11)

Says the Supreme Court of Indiana: "When a servant enters upon
an employment which is, from its nature, necessarily hazardous,
he assumes the usual risks and perils of the service. In such cases
it is held that there is an implied contract on the part of the servant
to take all the risks fairly incident to the service and to waive
any right of action against the master resulting from such risk.
The master in such cases impliedly agrees not to subject the servant,
through fraud, negligence or malice, to greater risks than those
which fairly and properly belond to such particular service." (12)

(9) Paule V. Florence Mining Co., 80^ Wis. 350.
(10) Foley v. Jersey City Elentric Light Co., 54 N. J. Law 411.
(11) Sherwood, Ch. J., Thomas v. Mo. Pacific R., 109 Mo. 187, 200.
