The Press. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1896. THE ADELAIDE HOSPITAL SQUABBLE.

Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9602, 17 December 1896, Page 4

The Press. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1896. THE ADELAIDE HOSPITAL SQUABBLE.

Press telegrams have from time to time drawn attention to the fact that there was something unusual going on in the Adelaide Hospital. Once we were told that nurses had resigned. Then we learned that the Board had been ceusured; then that the Medical Superintendent had resigned; then that the honorary staff had given up their posts. Next we learned that the Government had imported a surgeon and a physician from Home, and that the profession had boycotted them. More recently we were informed that a medical j-rofessor had expressed a hope that the new surgeon would, in the interests of humanity, make haste and kill someone in an operation—-to secure his dismissal.

These and other fragments do not make a connected whole, though they show that human nature in her ugliest mask is dancing with disease and death in the Adelaide Hospital. To make the position intelligible we will rehearse the matter from the beginning. The Hospital, which is a very fine one, is maintained almost wholly at Government expense by a grant of £13,000 a year. It is managed by a Board appointed yearly by the j Ministry, and its a«ts require and obtain, almost as a matter of course, | official sanction. Three or four years ago a system of certificating nurses was introduced, and all new nurses had to possess certificates. This system has been widely adopted as a brake on the rush to nursing by those who have newly discovered it to be a polite calling. But it is not likely that the newly-fledged certificated nurse was in any practical matter superior to the fairly educated and thoroughly devoted women who had taken up the profession before it became fashionable, and who had had equal hospital training and very much more experience. But there was an affectation of superiority on the part of the new comers, or, at least, a suspicion of it on the part of the old nurses. In short, there was a smouldering jealousy ready to flame up at the first breeze. The breeze soon came. Two years ago the night superintendency of nurses became vacant. The Medical Superintendent recommended Miss Gop.don to the Board, and the Board recommended her to the Government. But the Premier objected. Miss Gordon had had only four years' experience as probationer and nurse, while fourteen other nurses, some of whom had certificates, were her seniors, some of them by seven or eight years. But this was not all; Miss Gordon was the sister of the Colonial Secretary! We believe that Minister of the Crown had not used any influence, though the trouble led to his quitting office. But the brother's position may have influenced the Medical Superintendent in selecting the sister. In any case feeling ran very high. Miss Gordon belonged to the Superintendent's "set" and played tennis with him every day. The nurses protested in a body, and several of them wrote hot letters to the Board. But the Superintendent declared his nominee was the " only " one fit for the post, and otherwise reflected on the nurses. The Board stood by Miss Gordon. The daily Press teemed with the subject. The Government resisted long, but finally sanctioned the appointment. Thereupon the Board took in hand to chastise the aggrieved nurses for their outspoken letters. One was dismissed and the office of another was abolished. These dismissals raised the public ire. That a body of prominent citizens should be relentless towards honest and capable women who had had the courage to resent injury and insult was not to the mind of so Democratic a colony as South Australia. The nurses had demanded a Commission of Enquiry from the first, and now it was granted. Several of the nurses having resolved to leave the hospital gave some very outspoken and vigorous evidence, and then re.signed. The Commission found that the protests of the dismissed nurses were warranted, though the language

■was too strong, and recommended that upon withdrawing offensive expressions they should be re-instated. The Government adopted the report. 'L'he Board, however, were obstinate., Only after much trouble did they allow the •withdrawal of the words objected to, and then the Government had much difficulty in, getting the dismissed nurse re-instated. The other, whoso office had been abolished, was still left out. It is here that the Government appear to have insisted on the pound of flesh. When all the circumstauces are considered, it is evident that some i regard was owing to discipline and to the traditions of the service. A compromise was suggested—namely, that the Government should employ the two nurses in provincial hospitals. But a general election was at hand, and the. nurses' cause was popular. The Government paid Miss Graham's salary while she was unemployed, and when the Board's year was up appointed her as a charge nurse. The new Board was composed of new men of the right colour, and contained no representative of the honorary staff. This staff, of seventeen medical men, hereupon resigned—though they were appointed for fixed terms of years. The Medical Superintendent, the Superintendent of Nurses, and Miss Gordon had previously resigned. The Government carried on the hospital with the aid of various experts in the public service, and sent to England for a surgeon and a physician. The Medical Association of the colony supported the staff, and local applications could not be obtained. Even in England professional loyalty made the applications few. There had been 240 applications for one post a few years before ; now there were only eleveu for two posts. However, Drs. L. Napier and R. Smith, both with high credentials, were selected, and upon their arrival in the colony wero subjected to professional and social boycott and watched with unfriendly eyes. Those who remember how the German doctors treated Sir Morell McKenzie, will know how mean professional jealousy can show itself. The four house surgeons, young men at £50 a year, resigned, alleging the incompetency of their new superiors. Then Professor Watson, pathologist, described the operating theatre as a "butcher's shop," and wished someone would die under the knife to end the butchery. He overshot the mark, however, by announcing post mortems for next day on persons who speedily recovered, to falsify his gloomy predictions. Investigations showed, too, that his notes contained similar strictures on operations for years past. He was dismissed. Many efforts have been made to pour oil on the water, but without success. The Government have, therefore, sent to England for further assistance and expect.to win the battle in the end.

The whole affair is pitiful, and shows what great troubles and humiliations a little timely tact might have averted. But its main lesson is that political motives and feelings must enter into every institution controlled by the Government, and that the political spirit is ruinous to good management. Let New Zealanders beware.