
    Liberato et ux. v. Royer et al., Appellants.
    
      Workmen’s compensation — Alien nonresidents — Parents—Equal rights of nationals — Acceptance of act — Contractual relation — Act of June 2, 1915, P. L. 7S6.
    
    1. The Workmen’s Compensation Act of June 2, 1915, P. L. 736, is not unconstitutional as being in conflict with the treaty between the United States and the Kingdom of Italy as amended February 13, 1913.
    2. Such treaty guarantees equal rights and protection to the nationals of both countries with respect to cases of injury or death resulting from negligence or unlawful violence, no matter what may be the relation existing between the party injured and the one responsible for the injury.
    3. The Workmen’s Compensation Act did not take from any person the right to recover damages for injuries or death resulting from negligence or unlawful violence.
    4. Under the system provided by the act, an employee may recover for an injury for which his own negligence was entirely responsible, unless it was self-inflicted.
    5. The employer and employee may contract under which system they shall be bound.
    
      6. If a covenant of such contract is that nonresident alien parents of the workman shall not be entitled to compensation, the parties are bound by it.
    Argued May 26, 1924.
    Appeal, No. 6, May T., 1924, by defendants, from judgment of Superior Court, March T., 1923, No. 30, affirming judgment of C. P. Dauphin Co., June T., 1922, No. 397, affirming decision of Workmen’s Compensation Board in case of Pasquale Liberato and Anna Liberato, his wife, by attorney in fact Giovanni DeSanto, v. S. A. Royer et al., trading as Royer & Herr, and Travelers Insurance Company, insurance carrier.
    Before Moschzisker, C. J., Frazer, Walling, Simpson, Kephart, Sadler and Schaefer, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Appeal from judgment of common pleas to Superior Court.
    Judgment of common pleas affirmed and record remitted for further proceedings. Defendants appealed.
    
      Error assigned was, inter alia, judgment, quoting it.
    
      Paul A. Kunkel, with him John C. Afissley, for appellants.
    
      Arthur H. Hull, with him E. E. Beidleman, for appellees.
    July 8, 1924:
   Per Curiam,

The judgment appealed from is affirmed on the opinion of the Superior Court, reported in 81 Pa. Superior Ct. 403.  