INFECTIOUS DISEASES HOSPITAL.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIV, Issue 89, 15 April 1903, Page 2 (Supplement)

INFECTIOUS DISEASES HOSPITAL.

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —In reply to your leading article fef April 7th .on the above question Intrust that you will grant me space to defend myself against what lias been construed by a large body of your readers as duplicity on my part. jSTou say that on 23rd January last I made a statement in public to the effect '"that all minor infectious cases could be treated by the medical staff at the hospijtal by the erection of separate wards, iand that the board would have no hesitation in shouldering the responsibilty." But you do not say what I also said at jfchat time, that the Public Health Act, 3.900, would have to be amended in order ifco allow the board to assume that responsibility. Now, I wish it to be clearly understood that I have not receded Srom that position, for the simple reason jfchat in April of last year the board decided to have plans prepared for an infectious diseases hospital for thirty cases, that is to say, ten each for scarlatina, diphtheria and measles, and while ithat motion remains on the board's min&ite book I shall feel compelled to continue the same attitude in regard to this matter as I took up on the 23rd January last, when speaking to a conference of local bodies of Manukau county. In {order that there should not be any misunderstanding about this subject, and to let your readers see that I am not playing a doable game, as your leading Jartiele of the 7th inst. appears to suggest, and some of might infer, the following is a copy of the rainjute from the board's books dealing with Sfche subject matter under review, and 'dated April Bth, 1902 , just twelve months ago, and when there appeared, In the opinion of amajority of the board, ifco be a necessity to build:—''Resolved, ton the motion of Mr Bollard, seconded fey Mr Bruce, that in the opinion of the aboard it is desirable to take steps at jonee to provide accommodation for cases )of infectious diseases other than plague, leprosy and small pox. The motion was tarried. Ayes, Bollard, Bruce, Dignan, Stiehbury, Walters. Noes, Eriend and JGarland." Upon this Mr Sticfrbury, the fchen chairman, moved, and it was agreed &o "That Mr Bartley, the board's architect, in conference with the senior mediical officer of the hospital, be instructed jfco prepare plans and estimates for a Suitable bulldinginwoodto accommodate (thirty cases of infectious diseases, the fcuilding to be erected in the hospital grounds." In November of last year I jwas elected chairman of the board, and jalthongh I had voted against the building of an infectious diseases hospital in ifche hospital grounds on April Bth, as per minute above, still I felt it to be my Suty to respect the actions of the majority of the board, and I therefore stated to the conference of local bodies that, Sn my opinion, which was sunk in the (opinion of the board, that there was loom to build such a hospital in the hospital 'grounds. And let me say further that until the board rescinds that min■ute I must loyally administer the actions jof the board. Now, with regard to the expressions 'pi the honorary medical staff, their opinion had not been asked until a few days ago. Had the board asked the hono- . lary staff its opinion twelve months ago ifchere is no doubt the same answer would have been given. You seem to suggest ithat the staff ought to have given the board an opinion. Well, I should remind you of your own quotation from jCarlyle--"speech ia silvern and silence golden"—and the honorary staff acted ion Carlyle's suggestion. In their reply, however, when asked, there is no uneerjtain sound. They believe that an in- ' f ectious diseases hospital in the hospital grounds would be a source of danger to ifche patients at the general hospital. Dr. jCollins was asked to furnish the board avith a report, which he did, and it has teen published. But I fail to see why I should be blamed for directing him to ifurnisli that report, or for moving that *he board thank Dr. Collins, for it must have cost him both time and labour. Dr. Collins was asked for a report and he lias given it, and, like the honorary staff, One cannot fail to see that he would Safeguard the health of the general public when they are inmates of the hospital. As a layman it would be utter folly for me to say that thia or the Ibther place was or was not a suitable bite for the infectious diseases hospital. But, on the grounds of economy, there is »io doubt I have a right to say that (there can only be one opinion as to the advisability of placing the infectious diseases hospital in the hospital grounds as« against placing it at Point Chevalier.. Now, let us discuss for a moment jwhere this infectious diseases hospital might be put. It is not generally known ithat the board own some seven acres of iand (rather more) in Mechanics Bay, and adjoining the Outer Domain. The piece of land is at present all in cultivation and ia worth a considerable sum of money, as it is returning in rent to the board about £100 a year. I would suggest that some understanding should be come to with the City Council, who have the custody of the Domain, with regard to the desirability of making a suitable exchange with the board for a site on the hill and adjoining the hospital grounds. As a member of the board I should be willing to meet the City Council (who in this case and under the preeent Public Health Act is the local authority) in a spirit of fairness, as it Ss held by a large number' of medical men and many others to be a very suitable place to build an infectious diseases hospital for mißor cases. In making the exchange, however, all parties would have to be agreed, and the present public health law would have to be amended before the board could assume control of the hospital when built. I have no doubt that this suggestion will be met by some democratic cranks, who Will tell me that I want to steal a piece of the people's park and convey it to a dose corporation. A section of the press will no doubt be against such a proposal, and will hammer me till my bones are core for suggesting such a matter, but for these things I care nothing. Haviag counted the cost I am prepared to do what appears to me to be the proper thing. But it must be done in a proper and fair spirited manner to all parties interested. It is true the park belongs to the people, and it is also true that if the infectious diseases hospital were built where I have sug--1 Rcsfed the people would get the use of

It, and it -would be a greater benefit to the people than the present open paddock, which is never used by the public, t »ed no far as i can make out is only a I benefit at present to a large city eon--1 I? eWir ? ho * c hor «« 8 ar « depastured Irre;" c ; SJow ' »» cloeing, let me make ■ Wfr to correct W otatemeut to regard

to the hospital and charitable aid rate. This is id in the £ this year, and not 1/4 in the £, as stated by you in your issue of the 7th inst. I trust that you will try and find space for this rather long letter. My only excuse is that the subject is an important one.—l am, etc., GEORGE J. GARLAND. Chairman the Auckland Hospital and Charitable Aid Board. April 9, 1903.