THE GOTHIC CASE.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1190, 21 December 1894, Page 31

THE GOTHIC CASE.

A FINE OF £25 IMPOSED.

Mr Martin, S.M., gave his decision yesterday (Dec. 13) in the case in which Captain Kidley, of the s.s. Gothic, had been charged with a breach of the Public Health Act in not reporting a case of scarlet fever on the 14th November last. Mr Skerrett, for the defence, pleaded that a nominal fine would be sufficient to meet the case.

His Worship said he must convict tho defendant for making a false answer to question , 4, and he was bound to impose a substantial fine. The Legislature had chosen to make':this offence a serious one, judging from' the penalty (£200) which they had imposed. If tho case were one of wilfully endeavouring to mislead the authorities he could not see that any course would be open to him but to impose the maximum fine. In the present case, however,." the captain had to pay for the fault of- his' officer; he chose to rely upon the and the doctor chose to give his own ? opinion as a fact, and also to put his ' own interpretation on what was the lAvr of the land. For that; the captain had to suffer. He should impose a penalty of £25, but the mitigating circumstances Mr Skerrett had mentioned might very properly be brought before the Executive with a view to having the fine reduced. He should be very pleased to report upon the case if Mr Skerrett gave him an opportunity to do so. There was another matter arising out of this case to which the attention of the authorities and the public should be drawn. The medical examination and the passing by the Health Officer were a perfect farce, aK#*^43ref ; simply treated as a matter of mere form". The ship brought a man out from England who became ill before he reached tho Cape, got better, and was ill again between the Cape and Hobart. Before reaching Hobart he was reported as being unfit for duty, and the ship was within one day of Wellington before he was again reported as being fit for duty. Then th e

ship came into the Wellington Harbour, some hitch appeared to have taken place between the Health Officer and his medical adviser,,and the result was the ship got within 300 yards of the wharf, and the officer was obliged to put off to her to perform, his duty of pilot. On going up the ship’s side he asked a formal question of two officers who were standing on the deck: “ Are you all well?” He received an answer in the affirmative, and then went on. the bridge and began his duty of pilot. Subsequently the doctor came on board -and performed his duty .in the same perfunctory way. The ship’s doctor told him there were no infectious: diseases, the crew were mustered, one of the ship’s officers called over the. names without any check beingplaced upon him to see if the names were called oyer or not, and as each man was called he solemnly walked past the doctor, who then passed the ship. The vessel went alongside the wharf, and in a very few days a medical man on board sent a man to the Hospital as a matter of precaution, because he found him suffering from symptoms which might be those of scarlet fever. If the Health Officers were going to be satisfied with the ipse dixit of the ships’ officers they had better do away with the farce of making an inspection. If the inspection was to be carried out at all, the sooner the attention of the authorities was called to this case and the way the inspection was carried out the better. The defendant would be fined *£2s, with 15s costs. Mr Skerrett made a formal application for a mitigation of the fine. His "Worship said it certainly was a case jn which there ought to be a mitigation. Mr Gully appeared for the Crown.