INSPECTION AT PORTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19254, 17 February 1926, Page 12

INSPECTION AT PORTS.

WORK OF HEALTH OFFICERS. ALLEGATION OF LAXITY. REPLY FROM DEPARTMENT. HOSPITAL BOARD'S RESENTMENT Resentment at. the tone of a letter from Dr. T. McKibbin, written on behalf of the Director-General of Health, was expressed by the Auckland Hospital Board last evening. Tho letter was in reply to the board's reference to seeming laxity in the port health examinations. The correspondence arose over the case of a young woman, recently arrived from England, who was in hospital suffering from tuberculosis of the hip. It was stated she was likely to be a heavy charge in the hospital.

Dr. McKibbin wrote expressing his surprise that the board should speak of laxity of supervision in connection with the entry of tha. young woman into New Zealand. The board must surely realise that the inspection carried out by the port health officer could not be expected to disclose a case such as the present one, since it was quite clear there was nothing outwardly to disclose the fact, that the, young woman -was wearing a spinal jacket. To. undertake anything like a complete medical .examination of . the passengers and crews of incoming vessels would involve delays which neither the public nor the shipping companies would submit to, and justifiably so. " So long," continued the letter, "as we must be content with the present health inspection, so long will it be possible for odd cases of this kind to enter. I must confess I cannot see that, providing our. officers are reasonably vigilant, wo can do anything moro to safeguard the country." ... ,

" I do not like the tone of the letter," remarked the chairman, Mr. W. Wallace. Drl McKibbin was a servant of the public, and an officer of the department and he had no right to' write to the board in the strain *he had written. It was unjustified and uncalled for. Dr. McKibbin admitted there was laxity, but was not prepared to do anything to prevent it. Mr. M. J. Coyle thought the inspection was generally a very formal one. The matter was serious for the board, and it was unfair that cases of this nature should become a charge on the ratepayers.

The board recorded its resentment at the tone of the letter, and at the fact that tho department did not propose to do anything in the matter.