THE VACCINATION CASE. ROBERTS v. FITZGERALD.

Evening Post, Volume LVI, Issue 25, 29 July 1898, Page 5

THE VACCINATION CASE. ROBERTS v. FITZGERALD.

Dr. Ewarfc was under examination in the 'Supreme Court the whole of yesterday aCternoou. In reply to further questions by Mr. Skerrelt, counsel for the plaintiff, the doctor said vaccinal ulcers were rare, and he had not seen one. The insanitary condition of a house would not give a child syphilis. The child Olive Itoberts was in good health at the time he saw her save for the sores. All her symptoms were consistent, according to authorities, with syphilitic inoculation. He exaniiued the mother of the child last Saturday, and found no evidence of her having suffered from syphilis. Since then he had examined Mr. Roberta's throat, and could discern no evidence of syphilis. Cross-examined by Mr. Jellicoe — It was not a fact that he had taken very great interest in this case. He had wished he was not in it. Having heard that it was going to be proved that this was not a case of syphilis, and as he had never had the slightest doubt himself that it was, to show that he was right he had supplied counsel for the plaintiff, at their request, with memoranda on the subject. He was unable to say that the syphilitic virus was inoculated at the time oi' vaccination, but it got in either at the time or immediately afterwards. It must have been introduced into the wound at some time between the date of vaccination and a fortnight before he began to suspect its presence. He was a public vaccinator. The remuneration was 2s (id for each case, which fee went fnto his own pocket, but he had so few case 3 that he did not bother much about it. He had used humanised lymph, but lately had used nothing but calf lymph. Until lately there had been difficulty in getting calf lymph, or at least when he had applied for it he was unable to get more than sutlicient to start new cases. Calf lymph used directly it was taken from the calf was dangerous. A calf would not take syphilis, and there was no danger of inoculating syphilis from the lymph. There was no risk in using humanised lymph if a man was careful and took it himself. If calf lymph was used the contamination would come from some other cause, such as unclean instruments, or from the operator's fingers if he had failed to wash them after touching a syphilitic sore. Doctors knew the risk of contagion, especially when operating on a syphilitic patient. He had not seen any paragraph in the Evening Post referring to two doctors having been inoculated while performing an operation on a syphilitic patient. Mr. Skerrett protested against such a matter being pursued further, as being totally irrelevant and improper. The question had not the slightest bearing on the case, and he could not understand any reasonable person asking it. With a comment as to the "decency and manners" of his learned friend, Mr. Skerrett suggested that if necessary the matter could be referred to in • Chambers. Mr. Jellicoe — "Why in Chambers ? His Honour said Mr. Jellicoe could not pursue the subject any further. Dr. Ewart had said that he had not seen the paragraph. Dr. Ewart— l know nothing about the paragraph in the Evening Post. The Court then (5.25 p.m.) adjourned until next morning. To-day's Proceedings. Under further examination by Mr. Jellicoe, Dr. Ewart said he was not present at the examination of the child Olive Roberts, at Dr. Martin's. He heard of it afterwards. Drs. Cleghorn, Fyffe, and Faulke came to see him with reference to the case, and he described to them the symptoms which he had observed, though, perhaps, not quite so fully as he did in Court yesterday. He told them the leading features of the case. He was unable to state particularly what he told them. The Chief Justice — Dr. Ewart, I suppose, can't say anything more than that he told them what was true ? Mr. Jellicoe — Perhaps we shall find that he told the doctors something totally different from what he says now, owing to his having been working up the case since. Mr. Skerrett — That is a quite improper observation. Dr. Ewart — I did not work up the case. Mr. Jellicoe — We shall see. The witness said that at the conference the doctors spoke of having examined the mother of the child, and said there were certain symptoms indicative of her having had syphilis — the throat was suspicious. He could not say whether he informed them of the previous history of the parents, as he was not aware that he was acquainted with it at that stage. He attended the mother of the child born at Alexandra Home, but was unable to say whether the child was syphilitic. He refused to tell Detective Henderson what was wrong with the girl Dobsou, who recently died in the Hospital, but told him that if ..the father's consent was obtained he would give the particulars. He considered that he was not at liberty to divulge a professional matter. Mr. Jellicoe — Have you refused to give anj' information as to the cause of that girl's death ? — No. But there is something about the conversation with the detective which ought to be known. First, I refused to give information about the case. Then the detective told me that very probably a charge of criminal abortion would be brought against somebocty. I then said, "In that case, I can tell you I know nothing of abortion having been procured." You did not know about the child having been buried in a back-yard? — I did not know anything about that. Will you now tell me the cause of that girl's death, or do you still refuse ? — I won't unless I am compelled. The Chief Justice— l suppose that you have already done so. How was she buried without ? Witness — I gave a certificate in accordance with the law to the Registrar. Mr. Jellicoe — Now, what was the cause of death ? — The primary cause was syphilis, and the secondary cause peritonitis afte.r abortion. But just now" you said you told Detective Henderson that there was no abortion! — I said there was no evidence of criminal abortion ; that was for the police to find out. Why were you afraid to tell us just now that the cause of death was syphilis, and why say you would not tell until obliged ?—? — I was not afraid. When I got my degrees I signed a certificate that I would not divulge patients' secrets. If I did so, I am liable to be discharged from my University. Continuing, the Doctor said that when the police came to him he had not the slightest idea that the casa had any bearing on the case now before the Court. Mr. Oellicoe — We shall see. When did you sign the death certificate P — Quite recently. Was it not yesterday?— l don't know. It was within the last few days. The witness Avas asked a number of questions based on the report of the British Ro3 v al Commission on Vaccination, which he had not seen, and which «Mr. Jellicoe said he did not intend to allow plaintiff's

metlicnl witnesses to see until Ihey had given their evidence. It was the only copy in Iho colony, and he had specially obtained it from England. In answer to further question?, Dr. Ewarfc said that, syphilis might be inoculated by vacoinalion without any fault on the part oL the vaei'inator, c ueh, for instance, as by the use of impure lymph. Ho could nol s;iy Hiat tlu> ehilil would liiuc escaped syphilis altogether it it had no!, been vaccinated. JTt niiuht have contracted the disease by contact one e!.>e. Witness had kept no lecord of his diagno.-^is of tho child's symptoms.-, ami consequently was unable to si}' whether or not certain things existed. Mr. Jollicoe — If Ihat i^. the way people are t: oiled at the Hoi-pitul Mr. ykerrett — tSend them to Mr. Jellieoe. (Lauyhter.) (Left sitting.)