COOK HOSPITAL.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16118, 24 January 1918, Page 5

COOK HOSPITAL.

—. —<, ROYAL COMMISSION OF ENQUIRY. SUPERINTENDENT'S EVIDENCE. (press association telkgbam.) GISBORNE, January 23. Evidence at tho Hospital Enquiry was given by Miss Mac Lean, Registrar of Nurses, and Dr. Valintine, lnspectorGenernl of ■ Hospitals, ■ with regard to tho Departmental enquiry into tlio Kiggins case, which, they contended, was properly conducted. Asked whether he thought it was advisable for a medical man to bo a member of a hospital board, Dr. Valintine said ho did not think it" advisable, hut it would require legislation to alter the law. Ho had known medical men who had douo excellent work-in conjunction with hospital boards. The CommissionerYou-arc treading on dangerous ground, because this is ii democratic country. Dr.. Valintino said lie still held a high opinion of Dr. Bowie's professional qualifications, but ho did not know how with so littlo assistance, ho had been able to carry oa so ■well. He had been highly recommended by Dr. Sydney Smith, who now occupied a liigti-ad-ministrative position under tho Egyptian ' Government. Mr Lusk called Dr. Bowie, medical superintendent of the Hospital. Witness said he took charge of the hospital on March 31st,-1916, and'immediately there occurred two outbrenks of epidemics. Mr Lusk: You had no,assistance? — None, except the honorary staff. How many nights were you away from the _ institution during your regime?—Nono. How often in the year did you come to town?— Ten times. During that time how many patients had.you cared for? —2878 patients. An average of 137 per month? —Yes, that is not including out-patients. Regarding infantile paralysis, in your opinion the treatment given by the matron and advised by you was entirely successful? —Yes. Dr. Smith considered it so, and is compiling a book in which he asked mo to assist in giving information. He said he thought the. results were tho best arrived at throughout the Dominion.

Referring to tlie White case." witness i said Dr. Tieevo was his assistant at the | operation. _ He found it necessary to I remove the septic tube and tlio parts adjacent, which were subject to inflammation. Thero were also adhesions round the bladder. Mr Lusk: What do you suggest was the way the bladder became opened or snipped?—lt must have been by a tear, or in breaking down the adhesion it became torn. Witness added that he did not remember it being deliberately cut. Mr Lusk: And it was evidently necessary to pnt in a stitch or. two? —Yes. What happened "in that operation is a thing that has happened all the world over?—Yes;l have seen it happen frequently with tho most eminent men and at Edinburgh University. Witness proceeded to detail tho necessity for the second operation, and as to the dressing subsequently coming away: Naturally, the dressing was done by the nurses, and what took place could happen with the most careful sister. He had heard of similar incidents happening with the most eminent surgeons— Sir Frederick Treves, if he remembered aright, in connexion with his own daughter. Mr Lusk : Did you tell Dt. Reeve that tho matron was always talking about Dr. Collins and a nurse?— Yes. I said that she goes on as if sbe is suffering from delusions-of persecution, and that I had had some experience, and that she went on like that. _ Did you say she was mental ? —No, I did not say she was mental. And from your experience she was suffering from delusions of this persecution. and that she went on as if she had_delusions on these subjects?— Yes. Wa.s it a fact that Miss Tait was complaining continually about Dr. Collins and the Clarksons? —Yes, she was always talking of Dr. Collins. And she had a fear of the Clarksons? — and she thought I was in league with the nurses to do her_ harm. Were you in league with them?—■ Woll, I am prepared that you should go up and ask the nurses. Dr. Vnlintine was asked: Have you anything to say which might reflect on Dr. Bowie's administration? —On the contrary. Was it unusual for Dr. Bowie to take charge of the Mnallpox patient ?—No. Do you think his action was wise in remaining with tho patient?—l think ho is to he commended for remaining with that patient, because he could easily have evaded it. and said that he had other duties. In fact, that generally happened in isolated cases such as this. Tho Commission will probably conclude to-raorrow, when oounscl's addresses wjll be heard.