THE PALMERSTON HOSPITAL CASE.

New Zealand Times, Volume LVX, Issue 3129, 15 May 1897, Page 3

THE PALMERSTON HOSPITAL CASE.

Special to the New Zealand Times. Palmerston North, May 14. The talk of the town to-day is the Hospital embroglio, which was the subject of enquiry at the meeting of the Hospital Board yesterday. It appears that the matron of the Hospital had written a letter to the Board asking protection against a repetition of what occurred on Easter Sunday afternoon. One of the members of the Board, accompanied by a frisnd, visited the Hospital, and made a minute inspection of lavatories, &c. She disclaimed any feeling of malice towards the person referred to, but desired protection against a repetition of similar conduct in future. The member referred to, who declined to ait as a member while the charge stood against him, stated what had occurred. According to hia version, he had noticed something objectionable in the bath-room, and had asked the matron for an explanation, He affirmed that the matron declined to investigate what he pointed out to her, but that she informed him that he had no right to be In the Hospital at all.) On the matron declining to examine the bath the secretary (Me W. Rutherfurd), who happened to be at the Hospital at the time, was sent for. The member alleged that the secretary charged him with being under the influence of liquor, and, further, that he (the member) was not wanted to inspect the Hospital. He declined to apologise to the matron, as ho was determined to proceed further in the matter. He objected to the secretary giving his version of what had occurred, but the other members decided that the secretary should state what had taken place on the occasion referred to. Notwithstanding the strenuous opposition of the member whose conduct has been impeached, the Board insisted on the secretary narrating what had come under hia own observation. The member, on seeing that the other members were determined to hear the secretary’s account of what had transpired, left the room. The Secretary gave a very full and detailed account of all that had occurred. He hoard what had been said by the various persona. He described the member’s language and demeanour when he was in different rooms of the Hospital, lie heard the matron enquired for, and afterwards hot words passed between the matron and the member, tho former stating that the member must be out of his mind. The secretary, on hearing himself enquired for, went to the lavatory where the member was. The member referred to the Hospital management unobjectionable language, and was subsequently ejected by the secretary, who slammed the gate after him. Previous to doing so the secretary had locked the dispensary and surgery doors, and one of the nurses had locked the door of the private ward. It was explained that owing to the town water supply having been cut off the bath was filled with water for the use of the institution. Discussion followed, and the outcome was the passing of a resolution moved by Mr Lethbridge, M.H.R., and seconded by the chairman, to the effect that the Board regretted the action of the member referred to, and expressed a hope that he would either apologise to the matron or resign his position on the Board. The secretary was instructed to forward a copy of the resolution passed to the member whoso name was mentioned, and to intimate to him that the Board censured his conduct in causing to the matron, at the same time reminding him that bis duty should have been, if he noticed anything at the Hospital which he considered improper, to report the same to the Board. It was further decided that if no apology was made, as required by the resolution, that the matter should be brought tinder the notice of the Borough Council for it to take such action as it deemed expedient. A good deal of sympathy is expressed for the matron m this most unpleasant business, as she is generally esteemed for the faithful and conseientious manner in _ which _ she discharges jjier very responsible duties.