The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, JANUARY 16, 1890. THE TIMARU HOSPITAL.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1995, 16 January 1890, Page 2

The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, JANUARY 16, 1890. THE TIMARU HOSPITAL.

The hospital question has now been well ventilated, and it is with reluctance we return to it, but we are compelled to do so by the Herald. In Tuesday’s issue of that paper there appeared a letter, signed “A Temuka Eesident,” pointing out that it would seem from anything the Herald bad so far published that the only question involved was “ Whether or not Dr Blunden recommended Mrs Egan to go to the hospital ? ” The writer said that was a question of very little interest compared with shutting the doors of the hospital against helpless creatures, who were sick unto death. He then narrated how Mrs Egan and the girl Warne were treated, and said the real question was, “ Why the hospital authorities have acted in such an extraordinary manner? ” and he objected to this being lost sight of by being overshadowed by the dispute between the doctors. “ A Temnka Resident ” has done good service in W1 ‘ ! • i_ IJ ,s that letter, for until it was published the readers of the Herald were kept absolutely in the dark as regards the treatment meted out to Wrs Egan and the girl Warne. The Herald glossed over the subject, and made it appear that the whole affair arose out of Dr Blunden sending the patient to the hospital. The facts are pretty plainly before the readers of the Herald now, and they can see for themselves that the dispute between the is a very small matter compared with the main issue.

It would appear, however, that the Hera!d is angry at having been forced to publish the truth, fop it devotea a leading article to a reply to ‘‘A femuka .Resident.” It says in effect

that “ A ! emuka Resident ” does not know what he is talking about, and retails once more a matter which occurred in Wellington, i bis was a case of puerperal septicsemia, whica was admitted into the Wellington hospital some years ago, but it was days afterwards that the real nature of the disease was discovered. Before the doctors discovered the nature of the disease it had been communicated to some of the other inmates. On this ground the Herald insists that no patient suffering from such a disease ought to be allowed into the hospital. Now where is the analogy between this and Mrs Egan’s ? The fault in Wellington was that the harm was done before the hospital doctor discovered the nature of the disease, and a very serious fault it was. If the doctor had been

informed of it he could have isolated the patient. Now this is altogether different from Mrs Egan’s case. The I doctor in this instance was told the 1 nature of the disease when the patient applied for admission, and thus could have provided for it. We hope the Herald will not tell us the Wellington story any more, as it has no applicability to the matter under discussion. The Herald says, “ We should be the first to protest against any unnecessary obstacles being thrown in the way of admission (to the hospital), but as far

i as we are aware nothing of the kind has been attempted.” In the face of all that has occurred this is bold indeed. We presume the Herald has acted on the old maxim, that if one tells a lie at all he may as well tell a good one. However, that is the Herald s business. What we desire j to deal with is the dictum laid down, I viz. • That on no account must any j case of puerperal fever be allowed to enter the hospital. That is now the dictum of the Herald, and it continues • (t Eor the future we trust it will be understood in the country districts that it is worse than useless to to bring to the door of the hospital

any patient suffering from puerperal septicaemia” It would appear from this that the Herald is going to manage the hospital altogether, and has issued this warning to neople in the “ country districts.” *For the future they must not go. Let them die in the ditches, let them rot on the road sides, let what may occur, the Herald says that “ it matters not how large the institution is, or how great the conveniences for the treatment of disease, cases of puerperal septicaemia ought on no account to be admitted.” The question therefore is

settled, but it appears to us that very probably the people will have something more to say on the subject. Let us suppose that a homeless poor creature has the misfortune of suffering from this disease, what is to happen her? Let us again, for instance, suppose that a poor woman living in a sod whare at Eangitata is similarly afflicted, what is to become of her ? Are we to ask a doctor in private practice to attend her ? The private doctor must do one of two things he must give up his practice for several months, or go on disseminating this fearful disease amongst his patients. It is too much for the public to ask a private practitioner to sacrifice his means of living; it is in a sense murder on bis part to continue spreading thfl disease. Is there a man outside the walls of a lunatic asylum who will not agree that a doctor paid by the public is the proper person to attend such cases; and surely the homeless poor when thus afflicted are entitled to be sheltered from the inclemency of the weather. No one, of course, would put cases of this kind

into the general wards of the hospitals, but it is arrant nonsense to make it appear as the Herald does, that the difficulties in the way are insuperable. We have it on a very good authority that cases of this nature may be treated in the fever wards with perfect impunity ; but supposing that some risk might be incurred in allowing them there, then let some other place be set apart for them. At any rate we think that when the Herald takes upon itself to issue a ukase, like a grand Turk, warning “ country people ” that “ on no account ” will they be allowed to enter the hospital! it is time they stood up and asked it, “By what authority d» you dare to speak so ? ” Already there is evidence that they mean to do so. The splendid sermon preached last Sunday evening by the Eev. T. A. Hamilton will not go unheeded. With the broad sympathy and the true Christian charity which always distinguishes him he has taken the matter in hand, and will not readily lose sight of it. It is true that no wealthy patient will ever enter the hospital to be treated for puerperal ] septicaemia. They will be well looked after at home. The persons who must go are the homeless and poor, and probably the Herald does not think that money should be spent on providing accommodation for them.