PATHOLOGIST'S DUTIES

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22087, 17 April 1935, Page 15

PATHOLOGIST'S DUTIES

MUCH COURT WORK RIGHTS TO SPECIAL FEES ECHO OF BAYLY MURDER TRIAL The amount of private work to be performed in future by Dr. W. Gilmour, pathologist at the Auckland Hospital, was discussed at a meeting of the Auckland Hospital Board yesterday. The Finance Committee reported that it had held long conversations with Dr. Gilmour regarding the terms of his appointment and it recommended that they should be altered to give him the same privileges in regard to private fees as pathologists in the other centres, allowing for a retention of fees for coroners' post-mortem examinations, preparation of Court cases and reports and of Court fees. Regarding the fee of £262 10s received. from the Justice Department for work done on the Bayly murder case, the committee recommended that Dr. Gilmour should be paid £6O as his proportion for extra work entailed.

Mr. G. T. Parvin said he felt tb« Dr. Cilincur a s'lfficiint salary to retain the whole of his services. The time had come for the board to define the position. Great Value to Hospital

Mr. W. G. Mulholland said the board could afford to be a little more generous concerning Dr. Gilmour's remuneration for the immense amount of work he had put into the Bayly case. He moved that the payment should be increased to £IOO.

The chairman, Mr. W. Wallace, said the whole position had arisen out of a remark by Dr. E. B. Gunson to the effect that Dr. Gilmour was undertaking such a great volume of work that

the strain was likely to prove too great. Dr. Gilmour was probably an outstanding man in his profession and the board could congratulate itself on having insisted on his appointment at the time when it ivas made. The board could not pay him too much. Mrs. E. A. Kidd said £6O was only a pittance for the work Dr. Gilmour had done on the Bayly trial. More Generosity Urged

"Dr. Gilmour's value to the hospital cannot bp computed in pounds, shillings and pence," said the medical superintendent, Dr. J. W. Craven. "It seems unreasonable to deprive him of special fees. Post-mortem examinations are conducted in a room which is not the property of the board. A preparation fee is paid only for important trials, and the work would be done by Dr. Gilmour at home. Reports would be written in his spare time and Court fees are for actual attendance at Court. Dr. Gilmour's work in these directions has not interfered with his duties at the hospital, and the results which he gets out for me have never been affected."

Mr. A. L. Spence said Dr. Gilmour's contract showed that he had no right to special fees and no right of private practice at all. It was only right that there should be some rearrangement of the agreement, but the details needed to be more clearly defined than was the case in the committee's recommendations.

It was decided to refer back to the committee matters dealing with Dr. Gilmour's future rights in regard to private fees. The motion to pay him £IOO for his work on the Bayly case was lost and the recommendation of the committee that he be paid £6O was adopted.