MINING MATTERS.

Thames Advertiser, Volume VII, Issue 1848, 3 September 1874, Page 3

MINING MATTERS.

Queen of Beauty.—Hetorting for the Queen of Beauty took place yesterday at the threo batteries employed by tho company, as the final cleaning up of the crushing.? until such time as tho shaft uorka, to which we have already alluded, are so far completed as to enable the company to resume crushing again. The results obtained yesterday were as follows From tho Kuranui battery, 74ozs lodwts; from Bull's, llSozs; and from the company's own mill, 87uzs, making a total of 279nzs 15lwts. This, in addition to tho SODozs lodged on tiaturday, mikes the total return I,oßß™ lo in's I'or the fortnight, and out oi' this return a dividend is to be paid. The amount of dividend is not yet fixed, but it is expected to be over £200 per share, besides defraying liabilities and making ample provision for tho expenses incurred in connection with the shaft. The stripping down and retimbering of the shaft is not likely to occupy such a length of time as was at first contemplated. It is estimated to be completed in three weeks, and in tho meantime the reduction made in tho mine force is not very material. The contractors are still carrying on their operations, and the company's men are filling up the ground and working on the little leader. The sinking of the shaft for the purpose of opcLing up new levels is also progressing at the same time that the cutting down of tho upper portion of it is carried on. Tho shareholders expect to be able to resume crushing with as largo a force as that hitherto employed, in the course of three weeks.

Bird - in - H and. — J< etorling for the Bird-iu-lland Company tnok place yesterday at the Imperial Crown battery, after four days' crushing with 15 head of stampers, but the retulfc was a very moderate one, only amounting to 32ozs lOJwts gold.

Amuhnia. — The amount of stuff crushed for the yield of gold deposited on Tuesday by the manager of this company was 350 tons, so' that the average of the stuff is not very high, but a considerable proportion was littlo more than trial stuff. The proved reefs yielded well as usual. There is a good deal of work now carried on which will yield results by and by. The operations in the Whau adit level are likely to prove very valuable, for- there is a large strong reef in hand which is known to be auriferous, and there is a good prospect of the rich shot of gold of the Old Whau claim being recovered in this section of the mine. Systematic operations are also progressing for the development of the lodes in the old Carpenter's claim, and from these lodes some good results may be looked forward to.

MopiNG Stab Tribute.—A general crushing for tho tributers of the Morning Star mine, McGregor and party, was commenced yesterday morning at the Prince Alfred battery with a force of 10 head of stampers. A good payable yield is expected from the stuff on hand, but the parcel is not a very large oue. Point Hussfll Tbibute.—'The crushing for Teasdalo and party at the Priuce Alfred battery is not yet completed. It occupies 12 head of stampers, and appears to bo showing on tho plates for a payable return

Thijies Scottish (Late Wade Claim). —A small crushing of 7-i- tons for the old Wade claim was finished yesterday at the Phamrock battery, for a handsomo return o r 3oozs lOdwts.

THAMES HOSPITAL COMMITTER, The usual monthly meeting of the Hospital Committee was held yesterday at the Salutation Hotel. There wero present—Mr W. Uowe.(in the chair), the iievs. J. Hill, . Lush, T. Londergan, J. Crump; Messrs Power, Tyler, Wilkinson, Macnab, Gudgeon, Mcllhone, Bagnail, Prater, McDonnell, Cox, Sims, Souter, McCullough, and Henshaw.

House Committees i^EPour.—The report of the House Committee was read, but contained nothing of special moment. -Mr Bagnall moved that the report be received, He moved this in preference to the course usually adopted of moving the adoption of tho report.—Mr Kenshaw seconded the motion.—The Chairman thought some reason should be given for departing from the usual course. He had no objection to amotion for deferring the consideration of the report until the other reports wero read.— fho Ucv. J. Crump moved an amendment to this effect, which was carried.

Exclusion of Uon-Membebs fboji Mee uses-Mr Mcllhoue called attention to rule No. 2, for tho election of members. He asked the ruling of the Chairman, as there were several gentlemen present _ who wero not elected in accordance with that rule.—The Chairman thought they had no right to bo present-Mr Mcllhono said that it had been the practice far Dr. Lethbridge and Mr h ickcn to be present at the meetings. The reasori, no doubt, was in order that they might furnish information, but he did not think it right that they should be present at the discussions and deliberations of tho Committee.—Mr Tyler said that he recollected reading a report of a meeting of the Committee at which it was ruled that tho medical officers should be present at meetings, but should not be entitled to vote—Mr Wilkinson said that the presence of Dr. Lethbridge and Mr Aicken had on several occasions been found desirable and useful. In answer to Mr Mcllhone, tho Chairman ruled that no person should be present except members of the Committee. Drs. Lethbridge and Payne, and Mr Aicken then retired.—Mr jkenshaw moved that in the opinion of this meeting it was desirable that Dr. Lethbridge should be present at tho meetings of tho Committee. —Mr Tyler seconded the motion. The presence of the House Surgeon was highly desirable, and in calliug tho Chairman's attention to the rules the member had given no reason for doing so. Reasons hud been given why tho Surgeon should be present, and none against it.—Mr Mcllhono said that the presence of tho officers was likely to stille discussion and defeat its own object.—Tho motion was put and negatived.

Tmsuiiiiit's ii edrt,-Tho treasurer's report was as follows"Balancc-sheet for tho month ending 31st August, 1574; —To balance, £50 10s Id; Provincial Government, £250; subscription account, £23 Is; donation account, £1; patients' charges account, £2 10s; total, £327 7s Id. By salaries account, £59 13s 4d ; maintenance account, £50 Os 8d; drugs and appliances account, £2 3s; miscellaneous expenses account, £2 Os 7d; furniture account, £3 Os 9d; commission account, £1 15a 9d; balance at bank, £207 3s; balance in hand, £1 10; total, £327 7s Id. Liabilities: Salaries, £51 15s 41; general accounts, £8G <ls lid; total, £138 Os 3d. Assets: Cash balance, £208 13s; Provincial Government subsidy, £LG6 13s dd; total, £375 Gs 4d; less, £138 Os 3d; grand total, £237 6a Id, The report was adopted N

Mr Bagnall, referring to the House Curmiittee's report, moved that a porch be built to the femalo ward.—Mr Wilkinson said he saw no necessity for taking the House Committee's report clause by clause. It was departing from their usual course without any reason being assigned for it. He moved that the report be adopted.—Motion carried. Sdbgeon's Eei'ost.—The report of the House Surgeon was read and adopted. Alleged Mismanagement. — Subcommittee's Eepoet.—The Eev. J. Hill, on behalf of the Sub-Committee, read tho following report as the result of the investigation in reference to tho complaints as to tho ease of Mr Maurice Power: —

Hepokt of Sue-Committee on Inquiry

in the Case of Maurice Powek,

For a clear presentation of the case your Committee have classified the evidence under nine questions. First.—At the time of the admission of Maurice Power into fcho Hospital on 9th. May, was the wound considered daugerous?— Maurice Power said: I was of opinion that iny arm was only slighllv injured. I had no feeling in my hand" and up part of my arm after the accident.— James Bailie: I saw the wound on the morning after the admission of Power. The wound appeared to be a bad cut, but not much swollen.—Mr Mcllhone: On the night of Power's admission, I asked the doctor what lie thought of the wound. Ho said it was not serious,—Dr. Lethbridgc: My opinion of the wound at the first was that it was not serious. It did not appear to be of a dangerous character.— Dr. Kilgour: I saw the arm ten days after Power's admission. It was not then a dangerous wound.—Dr. Herston : The want of feeling after the accident was nothing particular. This is quite common in such cases.

Second.—What wero the indications of the wound becoming serious ;?—Dr. Lethbridge: The wound became serious when diffused inflamation set in; but when this occurred it is hard to say. Power's wound never assumed a very serious aspect until after the bursting of the artery.—Dr. lilgonr: The destruction of the arteries, caused by suppuration, brought on by diffused inflamation, led to the loss of the arm. The arteries might have been all right after the accident.

Third.—Can these indications be accounted for without the existence of any negligence or carelessness on the part of the Hospital management?-Dr. Lethbridge : The inflamation may have been caused' by a miasma. The inflamation may have been the result of the constitution of tho man being in such a low state. Fourth.—Was there any carelessness or negligence on tho part of the Hospital management, at the time of Power's admission that might have had some influence in leading to these indications ? Under this question three points for investigation were found to be implied. A. Were tho bones properly examined? —Maurice Power: I am sure the bono was broken. — Warder O'Connell : About a week after admission I kne tho bone was broken, and I told Power so.—Warder Smith : I knew it was broken from the way in which tho hand lay.—Dr Payne: I believe the arm was not broken.—Dr Lethbridge: I did not know at the timo of Power's admission that the bone was broken, nor do I know now that it was so.

B. Was tbc wound properly examined ? —Dr Payne: When the man was brought into the Hospital the wound ought to have been carefully examined.—Dr Lethbridge : I made the examination that I thought necessary. It is not always prudent to search or disturb a wound much. ~Wm. Mott: I saw the doctor examine the wound.—Dispenser Ailkcn: The wound was so much swollen that the doctor could not examine the wound.— Thomas Taylor: 'lhe doctor looked at Power, and touched the flesh alongside of the wound. Ho did not examine the wound. He gave some instructions and left.—Mr Mcllhone: I saw the wound looked at by Dr Lethbridge. From the manner in which he examined the wound I did not think much about it.

C. Was the wound properly treatod ? —Dispenser Aitken: I did not wash the wound. The doctor gave me instructions to poultice it, and I did. so in first dressing.—Thomas Taylor: I asked Aitken are there any bones broken ? He said I cannot tell; my instructions are to dress it and no more. As the doctor did not do any more, I am not justified in doing any more. Aitken put a splint cn tho arm and a piece of lint on tho wound, and bandaged it up.—Dr. Lethbridge: If left unclean it might produce inflamation, but not of that character which showed itself in Power's case—Dr. Payne: The wound ought to have been thoroughly cleaned. —Dr. Kilgour: From what I know, I should have cleaned the wound at the time of admission.

Fifth'—Was there anything in the attendance subsequently given to Power fitted to bring on tho serious aspect of the wound p Under this question four points for investigation were found to be implied.

A. Was the attendance on Power while bo was delirious sufficient P -Dr. Perston: I would have anticipated delirium in Power's case, especially at night; and when delirious, he should have had a mail constantly watching him. — Dispenser Aitken: Power was not delirious during the day, but at night. There was no special warder for Power, and be was consequently often left alone. — .Tames Bailie: I heard Aitken give the warders charge to look strictly after Power.— O'Connell: When away from him during the day a man was always left in charge.— Smith: The warder at night might bo away half-an-hour at a time; as the same man had to be in every place.—Qharles Eanaperi: Warders novor away more tbau half an hour. During tho day always somo patient was left in charge. —Thomas Taylor: Power was delirious cn the fourth day after admission.—Miss Milgrew: I first saw Power on tho third day after admission. Ho was then delirious. I was frequently with him from half to three-quarters of an 'hour at a time, and never saw any wardor or patient with him.

B. Were the bandages taken off by Power bimself; and if so what probably was tlio result.—Power: I am aware I took the bandages off on several occasions during the week after admission, especially at night. I was stopped doing so during the day once or twice. The warder found thorn off more thau once during the same night.—Aitken: I never heard of Power abusing his arm.— O'Oonnell: I saw the bandages loose the third day.—Smith: I have often found Power trying to lake the bandages off, and on one occasion he had them entirely off.—Bailie: On second or third night he was trying to talco the bandages off.— Miss Milgrcw: I found the bandages off on two occasions, and I pinned them on. The bandages were generally nearly off on my visits. O'Oonnell told me that in consequenco of Powor having taken the dressing off at night, the arm was getting I worse. On tho verandah tho nurso said Uq me, that ho had pulled off tho ban-

dages, and the cold had got in.-Dr. Lethbridge: Taking the bandages off might cause pain, and retard favourable progress.—Dr. Kilgour: The want of bandages would do harm. If, on one occasion ho took the bandages off, ho should havo been prevented doing so a second time.—Dr. Perston: If the bandages were taken off it would easily be seen in its effects on tho wound, which would be serious.—Dr. Payne: If he took the bandages off once, I would have secured him so as to prevent him doing it a second time.

0, Was the arm frequently moved or knocked about by Power; and if so, what probably was the consequence?-Smith : lie could not knock the arm about; he had not power to do so; he could not do so from his position in bed.—O'Oonnell: It was impossible he could move his arm about, it being laid securely, with a pillow between the fire-place and the bed. He could not throw 1 it down to the floor.— Bailie: He did not seem to move the arm much about; he did not seem to liave power.—Miss Milgrew: On the fourth day I found bis arm lying out of bed, I saw him let it drop on the floor on several occasions. He kept it constantly moving about. Oil the 2nd Sunday lie was very ill, and was allowed to throw his arm about as he chose. When ho became sensible the arm was so much swollen that he could not move it about. If lie was allowed to move it about when I was not there as when I was; it was enough to put it into a very bad state. In my opinion the man was iu such a condition he should never have been left alone. He has often told me he was neglected.-Dr Lethbridge: If the arm was permitted to be knocked about it would have no good effect. If the arm was set it could not much injure it.—Dr Payne: Moving it about would prevent the knitting: if there was movement it would be the cause of the arm getting worse.—Dr Kilgour: If be knocked his arm about it would inflame it very much, and would be the cause of the mischief. The arm ought to have been confined.-Power: I did say to the warders and to others I ought to be restrained, and am now of opinion that the loss of my arm was the result of neglect.—E. if. Power: Power complained to mo of not being restrained. D, When the artery burst was there proper attention P—Power: On the night on which the artery burst I lost a great quantity of blood. — Charles Ifanaperi: When the artery burst the warder was not long in being present.

Sixth.—Throughout the case was the examination of the wound by Dr. Lethbridge sufficiently frequent ? — Power: The doctor may have seen it once or twice aweek.—Missivlilgrew: Power never told me that the doctor examined the wound, but he told me the nurse did.—Aitken: I think the doctor must havo seen tho wound more than twice weekly. Ho could not see it properly on account of tho swelling. I never saw tho wound after the night of admission.—O'Oonnell: The doctor examined tho wound at least three times a week, I think. He could not lift up tho arm without pain being caused.—Smith: I could not say how often tho doctor saw or examined the wound.—Dr. Lethbridge: I cannot say how often 1 saw Power's wound, I have often seen Power without seeing thg wound. I did not think it necessary to inspect tho wound every day, even after diffused iniamation had set in.—Dr. Kilgour: I should havo seen the wound every day. Whether a wound is severe or not, this is the custom.—Dr. Payne: I should have examined the wound every day at least.—Dr Perston: I consider it the duty of Dr. Lethbridge to have seen the wound daily.

Seventh.—Was it proper that the wound should have been completely dressed before tho attendance of the doctor on all occasions, except when he had given instructions to tho opposite P — O'Connell: It is the invariable practice in the Hospital to have the wounds completely dressed before the attendance of the doctor in tho morning, except he says that he wishes to see a wound next morning. This was the practice followed in Power's case.—Dr. Kilgour: I think Dr. Lethbridge should have been always present at the dressing of the wound,

Eighth.—Was the exposure of the wound for about two hours and a half on one occasion injurious?-Power: About a month before I lost the arm it was stripped at half-past nine o'clook, aud allowed to remain so till about 12 o'clock. Duriug the time I frequently asked for the doctor. After that day I suffered much. The swelling was a good deal away before that. It then became very much swollen, and remained so. Remarks were made about the neglect by several in the HospitalBailie : I have soen the arm exposed. —O'Connell: I heard of the arm being exposed for some time.—Dr Kilgour: 'I he wound exposed in cold weather would be of injury to it, but exposed in the atmosphere of tlio Hospital would do it no harm.—Dr Payne: Exposure would not have much cfl' ct. —Dr Peraton: Ixposure to the air or cold for two or three hours would be highly dangerous—Dr Lethbridge: Air getting at the wound would not much injure it. If the wound was exposed to the air for two or three hours it would naturally swell, but would have no serious effect.

Ninth.—Should there have been a consultation sooner ? -Dr Perston: I was never asked to see the arm. The wound must have been very bad when the artery burst.—Dr Payne: I saw the wound some days before I tied the artery. —Dr Kilgour: I saw the wound only once, which was ten days after Power's admission.—Dr Lethbridge: I had a consultation on the morning after the artery burst, and another when it was decided to amputate the arm. Such, in a classified form, is the evidence which your Committee have been able to obtain, They have now to indicate the answers which, after patient and impartial deliberation, they havo decided to givo to the questions.

First.—When Power was admitted to tho Hospital, the wound was not considered dangerous.

Second.—The indications of the wound becoming dangerous were diffused inflamation setting in, and tho artery subsequently bursting.

Third.—There is no evidence to show that the serious symptoms were the result of miasma, or the low state of the constitution of the patient. Your Committee believe that when miasma gets into a hospital it spreads, and is difficult to get quit of. And .the very speedy recovery which tho patient made after the amputation of tho arm would lead to the conclusion that tho constitution is not likely to have been tho causo of tho dangerous symptomß.

Fourth.-Thero is no proof that on the admisson of Power the bones were not properly examined. Your committee thought it necessary to have the arm exhumed and examined by Drs. Kilgour and Perston; and their statement is that the arm was not broken, is there Buiciout evidence to lead to the conclu^

sion that the wound was not sufficiently examined. Aitken's statement that'the swelling was too great to permit of exami« nation is, according to the evidence, not correct. Tho examination seems to have been slight; but whether sufficient or not your Committeo are not prepared to say. But according to the medical opinion obtained the wound should have been cleaued, a thing which according to the evidence was not done.

Fifth.—The attendance of Power in delirium was not sufficient. There is no evidence that this was the ease on the night of the bursting of the artery. But it is certain that the bandages were frequently taken off, and that tho result must have been injurious. Your Committee also think that it is proved that there was a moving and knocking about of the arm. They believe that from the position of the bed against the fireplace this was quite possible, and that the statement that the patient had not power to move tho arm about refers to a subsequent stage. The testimony of Miss Milgrew on this point is very strong, and your committee believe the effects must havo been very injurious. It is difficult to suppose that this should have taken place so frequently and to such an extent when this visitor was present, and not at all when she was absent. Hut apart from this, it is certain that the pulling off of the bandages was fully known; and that this should have been permitted night after night, and several times on the same night, is a matter which your committee think is worthy of great blame. If the- warders were not able to do the work properly, additional help could easily have been obtained. It does not appear that the doctor was aware of this, nor is it certain Mr Aitken was; but both warders were fully cognizant of it.

bixth.—Tho examination twice or thrice a week your committee considered was not sufficient. The medical testimony on this point is conclusive. Especially was it not sufficient after diffused inflamation had set in.

Seventh. The practice followed by Dr Lethbridge of permitting the wound to be dressed and completely bandaged up before he attended, unless special orders to the contrary were given, your Committee consider highly objectionable; as it is making not himself but the nurse the judge of the state of the wound; and in this case it was all the more objectionable, as the dispenser and the warders declare that, from the difficulty of raising the arm, they never saw the wound at all.

Eighth. Although the opinion of the medical men is conflicting in regard to the exposure of the wound for some time, the committee, especially on account of the testimony of Power himself, are afraid it was injurious. At any rate they certainly disapprove of the nurse keeping the wound undressed so long, and of the doctor not attending till 12 o'clock, when he had given orders on the previous day to have it left undressed for his inspection.

Ninth—From the serious nature of the wound, a consultation ought to havo been, held sooner. The case became serious after diffused inllamatioa set in; ana before the artery burst the in a very bad state. Yet, up 'to that' time two additional medical men had seen the case only once, and there was no consultation till after the bursting of the artery. As there aro Honorary Surgeons appointed for tho purpose, there ought to have been a consultation much sooner.

Your Committee cannot conclude without stating that in giving his evidence Maurice Power manifested a spirit which' elicited their highest commendation. Testimony against others had to be drawn from him, and if he could at all give an answer favourable to others he did it. Throughout his examination he was thoroughly free from all ill-feeling or malice against anyone; and your Committee desire to express their sympathy with him in the calamitous circumstances in which the loss of his right arm has placed him. James Him, Chairman.

—Mr Bagnall said it was a matter of very great importance in the management of the Hospital. The report had been drawn up wilh a great deal of care, but in order that they might have time to consider it fully they should adjourn the further consideration of the subject for a week.—Mr Mcllhono suggested that the report should be printed and copies furnished to the members -Some discussion took place with, regard to getting the report printed.—Mr Wilkinson undertook to publish the report in the Thames Adveemseb, and the imtter was finally left in the hands of the President.—Mr Renshaw made au explanation. The report was a very long one, and had been drawn up yesterday from fife people's notes. .He said then he did not agree with it as a whole, and he said so at the time. -The Kev. J. Hill said he did not think Mr Renshaw was acting fairly to the sub-committee. He dissented from two points only, while it was agreed to as a whole by the other members. He did not think Mr Renshaw had any right to take this stand now before the Committee. '

House Committee.—The Rov. J. Crump, Mc Day, Mr McDonnell, and Mr Sims were appoiutcd House Committee for the ensuing month.