AN EYE SPECIALIST.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6625, 15 September 1908, Page 5

AN EYE SPECIALIST.

ONE THOUSAND POUNDS DAMAGES CLAIMED. ALLEGED WRONGFUL TREATMENT VERDICT FOB DEFENDANT. (From Our Own Correspondent.) p VLMERSTGN, September 14. At the Supremo Court this morning, before Mr Justiee Cbapium and a pn-y. Elizabeth Dunetall. of Danncvirke sued Henry Edward Perry, oeuhst, ot 1 almerston. for JEIOCO .damages or alleged wrongful treatment to her right c>o. - -i W. h FUzherbert appeared for the plaintiff and Mr T. M. Wilford for the defendant. PLAINTIFF’S EVIDENCE. Elizabeth Dunstal! stated that she suffered from inflammation of an eye and came to Palmerston to get it treat, ed. Sho requested Perry to look at the eye, and lie told her she could be cured. Ho covered her good eye, and sho was aide to read with tho other quite plainly. He injected fluid and rubbed tho eye for about ton minutes, then put more fluid in the eye. and rubbed in for about live minutes. The eye iw' painful during the rubbing. Ihe dc fendmit darkened the room, lit a S*> jet, put a glass ou his eye, and one on hers She felt a burning on her cueek and'eye, and said; ‘’t'ou are, burmiig my eye out.' Defendant stopped immediately and injected more fluid into her eye, and rubbed it a little. He told her tao. eve was absaluVdy no use, and sho had better have it taken out and have an artificial pupil, fahe asked lam if lie could do it, and he said he could. Witness was almost mad with pain, one promised to go back at 2 o’clock i© have the eye out. Witness, howewer, was not satisfied with Mr Perry’s treatment, and determined to consult someone else, bhe went bo Dr Martin, who ordered her to a private hospital. This she could not afford, and went to Dannevirke, where ©he had since been attended by Dr Mackay. Since tho treatment by defendant her eyo was very bad for about li\o weeks, when it gradually began to get better, until now ©he could see a little on a dull day. Her left eye, too, had been very painful and sore, and siio could not continue her work. CROSS-EXAMINATION.

Cross-examined by Mr Wilford, the witness said she was taking the case by herself, and not on behalf of anyone else. She had not told »Mia© Garner that Dr Martin had told her to go for Perry, as ho wanted him out of the town. It was not true that Dr Martin had offered to find her medical men and a lawyer. She was paying tho expenses herself. . ~ . .. Elizabeth Saunders, mother or the plaintiff, gave corroborative evidence. WHAT THE DOCTORS SAY.

Dr Mackay stated that he saw plaintiff on June- sth. Her eye was very much inflamed. Ho diagnosed the trouble as rheumatic iritis. Defendant when he diagnosed the case as a certain other form of iritis was merely guessimr. Rubbing the eyo for a time would account for the irritated state. Massago was not the right treatment for rheumatic iritis of the eye. He had never known a medical man to use this, form of treatment for the disease. Irritation would bo caused by massaging. Witness tested plaintiff's eye on June sth, and found the vision very much impaired. There was a possibility of plaintiff going blind owing to the sympathetic trouble that might extend to the other eye. It was possible to restore the eyesight of a person suffering from iritis, and he thought if the case proceeded as it did plaintiff's eyesight might become normal again in six raonths. Dr Martin gave evidence to treating plaintiff. IT© explained the condition he found her in. the dbfencA Defendant Perry said he felt quite qualified to deni with the case. He was not a qualified practitioner, but had gone through a course of chemistry. He had had experience of eye treatment. In any case ho did not feel competent to deal with he called in Dr Borghctti, of Wellington. _He considered ho was justified in calling himself an optician. Dr BorghetH, of Wellington, deposed that he was a duly qualified medical practitioner. He had known Perry a number of years, and considered him intelligent and honest. He had given him tuition in eye treatment. Perry had dteenosed the case correctly, but witness could not say that massage wns proper under the circumstances, neither could he snv Perry was justified in calling himself an eyo specialist. Dr O'Brien gave evidence, mostly of a technical nature. THE VERDICT. Tho jury returned a verdict for the defendant, with costs at scale rates and witnesses* expenses and disbursements to bo fixed by the Registrar.