THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. WEDNESDAY, MAY 29, 1895.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 9832, 29 May 1895, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. WEDNESDAY, MAY 29, 1895.

The letter of Dr. Girdler and Dr. Koberton to the Charitable Aid Board, published in our yesterday's impression, is a very unfortunate document. It purports to have been written "on behalf of the honorary medical staff but we cannot believe that all the members of the staff had that epistle submitted to them, and approved of it in cold blood. The members of the Hospital Board have occupied their time a good deal lately in " washing dirty linen" in public. They have, however, shown that they thought they had done too much in that way, and that the time bid come when the process must stop. They had asked for a conference with the members of the honorary medical staff, in order that some satisfactory system of hospital management might be adopted. It was quite clear from what had been stated at the meetings that the members of the Board were quite willing to give up some of the powers heretofore exercised by them if a medical man of experience were appointed, with full charge of the internal affairs of the Hospital.

In these circumstances, the members of the honorary medical staff should have been glad to meet the Board, and to give every assistance towards putting the management of the institution in an efficient and satisfactory state. Instead of that, however, the medical staff most needlessly drag up everything irritating that they could think of. The policy of persons desirous of the welfare of the Hospital would have been to let bygones be bygones, and to have endeavoured to have a good arrangement made for the future. The letter ought never to have been written. It was quite unnecessary, in view of the proposal of the Board. Any person of common judgment must have seen that such a letter would be considered offensive, and would at once put a stop to any possibility of a conference. It is very hard to think that the doctors did not see what the effect of sending that letter would be, and deliberately intended to bring about the inevitable consequences.

The first accusation which the medical staff bring against the Board is that they set up a committee to examine into the working of the institution. Surely the Board are entitled to do that if they think that an improvement can be made by obtaining full information. If the committee acted indiscreetly in pursuing their investigations, and dealt with matters which the medical gentlemen thought ought to have been left to them, a respectful representation ought to have been made. At the present time there was no need even for such a representation, because any new proposals could have been discussed at the conference. The medical staff then proceed : —" The refusal of the Board to adopt the recent recommendation of the House Committee with regard to the dismissal of certain officials, is to the honorary medical staff inexplicable if the members of tlie Board are sincere in wishing to maintain discipline." This refers to the recommendation at the instance of the medical stall that Nurse Laird should be discharged because she placed in her book the famous witticism about " reflex action." The Board felt that Nurse Edwards, who was an official of greater experience, was as much to blame as Nurse Laird. The doctors, however, would not hear of both being discharged, and so the Board decided to discharge neither one nor the other. The doctors, also, with-

out giving any sufficient reason, recommended the discharge of the seven " charge nurses," but the Board declined to carry out this wholesale order without knowing why th»y were required to take such a harsh step. All these charge nurses have been several years in the service of the Board, and ought not to be discharged and disgraced without a very sufficient reason indeed. Another fault found by the doctors with the administration of the Board is, "The frequent presence at the Hospital of certain members known as the Fees Committee." The Fees Committee believe it to be their duty to visit the Hospital to see that the public are not imposed upon. We do not suppose that any of them go there for amusement, and they do not interfere with the treatment of patients ordered by the staff. But their very presence is an offence. The members of the Board are then accused, in a wholesale way, of making " false statements." This most grave of all possible charges is flung in the faces of the members of the Board, knowing that it would be published, but no attempt is made to support it. And it is made just when the parties were about to take part in a friendly conference. The doctors could surely not suppose that the members of the Board would be mean-spirited enough to quietly pocket the deadliest insult which one man can offer to another.

Lastly, and as a climax to the charges which the doctors have to make against the members of the Board, we have this :—" The misappropriation of medical stores by members of the Board for their own use." This refers to the fact, we believe, that during the protracted sittings of the committee at the Hospital, one or two of the members had on two or three occasions a little whisky and water, or a cup of tea or coffee, or whatever refreshment they were accustomed to. To find fault with the members of the Board on this account was quite beyond the function of the medical staff, and shows that they have gone rakii.g about for accusations in order to make a conference impossible.

The medical staff must remember that the members of the Board are elected by the public to take charge of the Hospital. They are endowed with full charge by Act of Parliament, and they have no right to submit to the direction of any other authority. The public would not allow them to do so. As representatives of the public they must have self-respect, and they ought to be treated with respect. If they allowed themselves to be degraded and insulted by any body of men, even by men whose professional services to the Hospital have been of great value, the public would severely blame them, and declare them unworthy of their trust. The members of the Board have taken the course of asking the medical staff to withdraw the letter, and we sincerely hope that this will be done. That is the only chance we see for a satisfactory arrangement being come to for the good working of the institution.