THE unknown CASE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXIII, Issue 33, 9 February 1892, Page 2

THE unknown CASE.

! DISCUSSION BY THE HOSPITAL j BOARD.

I Ala. C.vuiiATT moved, " That the resolutions ; ! now upon the books re the caso of appeal | bo rescinded, ami that tlio Board's solicitor ii'i'.e notice of di-continaarico of the said 1 | apt.K-uJ." Ho thomrhi, the Board should 1 ! noti' admit; defer, also that 'hoy had no 'I mr.nev to carry on the contest, and shouio ■ I f!i.-cot"itiniio tho appeal. Be believed that ;! it r.ovet.t- hud any claim, it. was not ajrr.iri^fc I tho Board. They had already paid, cos! sin 'I the cause, and were required i<> deposit ' j security ic.-r further cots. They had, he iiiiid.ers.tood, illegally deposited &eeurir.y j under tho Costloy Iforne trust. They I were in debt, their revenue was I not equal to their expenditure, and iho thought l.hore wars every reason why i they should discontinue the appeal. Mr j Cordon seconded the motion. Mr Bollard I believed that if the Board struck a balance i they would come out, £12,01)0 to tho good, | and' urged that, if was very wrong to create jan impression 'hat '.ho Board was in n | b.udu-npt estate. lie would oppose the j morion. Mr Lennox 'disapproved of the I motion. It, was n serious matter Mi at ! where a perfect euro was impossible, the j Board should be held liable lor damages. |Be regarded tho claim in this 011-0 as a I most unjust one. It was. the duty of the Board lo protect tlio ratepayers, and lo carry the appeal to the highest Court inside or outside ot tho country. Tho Chairman said that every individual who couid get a nurse behind him or v disappointed doctor to back him up, was in a position to sue tho Hoard and obtain damntres tor alleged negligence either from the Board or from the doctor. 'The position of every practitioner and every Board in the ! colony wa-i jeopardised by tho decision in I Bovot.t's case. It was the duty of tho I Board to gel: the decision reversed at the j Court of Appeal, and, failing that, to ob- | lain an amendment of tho Act. Their do- ! licioucy in ie>euuo now was hocui.-o of the ! amount of £700 already gone in legal cxi penses. Mr Cordon said this was assumed to be a 1 larifo public qiioslion, and ho did not see it 'to tie' the duly of the Board to i'iglit fiie ; matter out fur Ihe bonelit ot the whole ol I 1 he lioaids in tho iv.h.iny. Bo did not ree I thai, they had suilicboiCy gootl louson I.IC ' assume that the decision by tho , Supremo Court would be reversed. ! Mr C.i 1 ratf. in his r.-piy said he. regarded ! !it as very strange iii_tlho action u_-"innt | ! Br. Coliin- was duiooutinucd. 'Iho Board 1 ! was practically 'lie victim, but he felr. con- ! vincetl theio was not iho sli'_'hlc:it chnnco I lof lettering their po.-itiun. and disircl to ■ ontci hi- protest against the expenditure •df more 11: 1 n-.;,. \ Tho motion acpdnefc appeal was put, and i hrvi iho support of Messrs Canal,', Cordon, ! and Ke'.d, while ,M«_i-ra Mays, l.cniuiv ami , I Boihtrd wilod atodost ir. Too Chairman; i gave ho. vote siiiti tlm noes, and ihe motion I I .va.i lost.