CORRESPONDENCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXII, Issue 7269, 6 March 1885, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE TRAMCAES. TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Seeing a letter in Wednesday's Hkkald, advocating the use of loader whißtles for the. drivers of the tramoars to warn people off the line, 1 should like to euggest that the horses have » small bell attached to their bridles or collars, the plan adopted in America. How can a driver etop his horses, put the brake on, and blow hia whistle with one pair of hands ? J think they have all their work to do to manage their horses, seeing they are nearly all young animals, and not properly used to their work yet.—l am, &c, Robin Hood. Auckland, March 5, ISSu, PASSING CLOUDS. TO THB EDITOB. Sib,—Dark as the outlook is at present, with both Egypt and Asia en our hands,! believe the horizon will clear without any really great disaster befalling us, just at pre. sent at all events. One outcome of the present complication*, however, is to my mind very feasible.' The unity of the Emp're at the present juncture is indispensable if we are to show a bold front to the rest of the world. Give then to the Irish people that meed ot a self-Governmeut which is the just right of a free people (they have at least as much ability; to govern themselves as we have out here), and we shall have united an Empire truly vase and powerful, ready if needa be to meet any combination which the coming Continental' wire-pullers may devise. ■ J5. F. -G, THE HOSPITAL DIFFICULTY. TO THE EDITOR, Sib,—l shall be glad if you will give place to a few remarks upon the above subject from one who doee not agree with your line of thinking. lam afraid that in your subleader, and indeed throughout all your deliverauces upon the present Hospital trouble, you have Allowed a pronounced partiality for Dr. Bond, due no doubt to sympathy for hii youth and want of experience, to influence and to some extent to blind your judgment. I think you have lost eight of the fact that the origin of the trouble lay in Dr. Bond's having neglected and refused on different occasions to carry out the clearly expressed directions of Dr. Kichardeon, and in this Dγ, Bond was—beyond dispute — wrong, and clearly responsible for any ill-effecta resulting from such neglect. The question bo fre> quently and so unnecessarily raised by yourself and by correspondents, as to whether Dr. Bond's abilities are higher than any or all of the members of the visiting staff, should not be allowed to enter the discussion. When lie accepted the position of House Surgeon he accepted the duties and position whieh the rules of the Hospital appoint to that office, and the position is clearly one of subserviency to the visiting staff. That this should and must be bo is clearly evident. The visiting staff has always embraced the leading members of the profession here—whereas the office of the House Surgeon is sought after by th !se younger members of the profession who require the additio.al experience■ and knowledge, best obtainable at the Hospital, and which is necessary to enable them to commence private practice successfully. That Dr. Bond has not always fulfilled the duties of his office satisfactorily' is shown by the fact that not many months since the visiting staff unanimously asked the committee to request Dr. Bond's resignation; and the treatment by the committee of that, request from the staff evidenty explains Dr. Richardson's unwillingness and delay ia bringing Smith's case forward. A man in ' Dr. .Richardson's position would naturally be unwilling to submit himself to a second rebuff from a committee whose interests he was serving gratuitously, and at a consider* able sacrifice of time. And here allow me to point out that it seems hard that a man who has for more than a year daily devoted several hours of his valuable time (for to 4 doctor in extensive practice time is valuable) to the public good and without reward, should, in connection with that gratuitous service, be subject to the harsh criticism, made upon Dr. Richardson by yourself. Whatever opinion we may hold of his action in this matter, and whether he be right or wrong,-we can have no doubt that he has acted conscientiously in the public interest. Your accusation of nnmanlinees against Him is vindictive, and will not hold. His lettec to the papers at the commencement of the present trouble, if it be anything at all, is certainly outspoken, plain, and without cover. It must be gratifying to him to learn, upon Dr. Grabham's authority, that already, as the outcome of his action, such an improTement has taken place in fche Hospital that patients have now no complaint to make concerning Dr.' Bond's treatment. To my own knowledge Dr. Grabham oould not have made such a report two months iiince.— l am, &c, Odtsidke. Auckland, March 4, 1885.