SUIT AGAINST DOCTOR

Evening Star, Issue 18714, 16 August 1924, Page 5

SUIT AGAINST DOCTOR

THE AUCKLAND CASE. DEFENDANTS EVIDENCE. [Peb United Press Association.] AUCKLAND, August 15. The case in which Mrs Lawrence, of Hamilton, claimed £2,000 damages for alleged negligent trcameut by Dr Dundas Mackenzie, was continued. The defendant, Henry Dundas Mackenzie, said ho had been practising medicine for 28 years. In addition to his ordinary practice ho used Abrams method of diagnosis and treatment. When plaintiff and her husband came to_ him in August, 1922, the husband said that doctors advised an operation, but his wife refused to have it done. Witness examined her by ordinary methods, which lie checked by Abrams method. The condition of Sirs Lawrence was a common one. Ho told her his opinion was that it was a case of mastitis and not cancer. He told Mrs Lawrence that she would bo , treated under Abrams system. That was what she came for. Defendant had successfully treated many cases of breast trouble by Abrams method. Ho did not believe in an operation for mastitis. For the eradication of cancer an operation would bo very expensive and very serious, and bo would not advise an operation except in malignant cases. After the first five weeks’ treatment Mrs Lawrence left without consulting him about going away. She bad further treatment from October 12 to October 27, and the following year she had seven days’ treatment in March. When she loft him on _ September 8 it was without asking His advice, and it was not advisable for her to go away at that stage. Sim came back without announcing _ her intention in March of the following year. He had not told her she was cured. lie last saw her in September. 1923. He advised the removal of the breast, and defendant told him she had bruised her bieast. The first indication he received of being accused of negligence was when lie received a letter from Mrs Lawrence’s solicitor. In September, 1923, defendant advised an operation, and her delay in waiting for another month might have been fatal. When ho advised her to go into hospital in Auckland it was with the idea of getting a surgeon to operate. Ho did not propose to operate himself. Defendant said he bad worked with Dr Abrams for three months. He was with him in 1920, and he went back in 1922. Abrams had taught this work since 1912. Cancer might easily have developed in between Mrs Lawrence’s visits to him. He had known cancer to develop and cause death within two months. Defendant denied having told Mrs Lawrence when she complained of much pain that the “ germs were dying hard,” or that ho told her she need never see any more doctors. He also denied that ho had told her she could go home and return for further treatment after he came back from America. Ho did not tell Mrs Lawrence she was cured. Defendant denied that he told Mrs Lawrence he could cure her “ without punching holes in her.” Ho also denied having told plaintiff she would bo a surprise for the Hamilton doctors, as be had cured her without an operation, or that on September 23 lie told hor now long she was or was not going to live.

Mr Strang (for plaintiff): Yon do claim a more scientifically accurate diagnosis by Abrams methods than by ordinary clinical methods P—l do think we can got a greater proportion of accurate diagnoses. Defendant was cross-examined as to the results of the blood tost. Asked how the breast compared in March, 1923, with August, 1922, defendant hesitated in bis answer, and His Honor asked him whether ho did not keep records of his cases. Dclendaiit explained that he did not. His Honor: Then you are depending entirely on memory?—\es. Yon bad a groat many patients, hadn’t you?—Not so many as I did, now that I am being persecuted by the British Medical Association. But have yon no records?—My nurse keeps the records. Then you have oue of Mrs Law--rence.—No. It is an old case. I do not keep records over twelve months. Mr Strang: You got a letter from mo in November threatening action. Did you not keep Mrs Lawrence’s records then?, —No. You knew they would be wanted?— No. The year ends on November 1. Oh, I was just seven days too late with my letter. That is a pity. _ Questioned as to his qualifications, defendant said lie was a graduate of the Homoeopathic Medical College, Missouri, United States of America, and he commenced practice in New Zealand in 1896. . Mr Strang: Is that college still m existence? —L can’t toll you. I suggest it went right out in 1908. I do not know. Defendant said he had taken a full six months’ course in biology at Dunedin in 1892. He was the only autohemic surgeon loft in Now Zealand. The others had died or bad left the country. Ho bad also' trained under Dr Pratt, Chicago, in orificial surgery. He bad practised that on some patients, but not many. The object of this was to free the nerves that were pinched and causing a drain on the system. William Haddow Pettit, medical practitioner, who had himself been treated bv the Abrams system, said bo bad practised and considered the method suitable as an adjunct to other treatment. ' .lames Dalziell, who described himself as a medical practitioner, of Pukckobo, but who is not now on the rolls, said that Mrs Lawrence told him -she bad received a blow ion tho breast since being treated bv defendant. Mrs Lawrence (recalled) denied telling Dalziell that she received a blow or a bruise. . . The bearing of evidence is concluded.