Waipawa Hospital Board.

Waipawa Mail, Volume XVI, Issue 2716, 2 February 1892, Page 4

Waipawa Hospital Board.

Tbe Board met on Saturday afternoon ]ast, at the County Hospital. Present Messrs Smith, Scrlmgeour, HarJiug, Bibby, and Groom.

After a short preliminary discussion as to whether, in the absence of so maoy members, tbe Board shouM only appoint a Chairman pro tem., it was decided to fill that office for tbe rema : oder of the term ; and on tbe mot ; on of Mr Groom, seconded by Mr Harding, Mr Smith was elected Chairman.

The Chairman briefly returned thanks for tbe boaor conferred upon h*m, and expressed regret at the death of the late chairman. He little anticipated, when he proposed Mr M.ackersey as Chairman at last meeting, that they would be so soon called upon to elect his successor. He referred, in terms of satisfaction, to the harmony and unaoimitv of opinion which had prevailed at their meetings during Mr Mackersey’s long te-’m of office, and bore testimony to the good wor k which he had done. He con eluded with the following motion ; “ That a letter of sympathy be sent by the Board to Mrs Mackersey, expressing their deep regret at her sad loss, the late Mr Mackersey having been the Chairman, and for many years a member of this board.”

Mr Harding seconded the motion, and expressed bis agreement with the remarks of the Chairman. Those who had known Mr Mackersey best appreciated him most.

The other members expressed their concurrence, Mr Groom remarking that men who would assume and conscientiously discharge public duties were not as plentiful as might be desired.—Motion carried unanimously. The minutes of the meeting of 2nd December were read and confirmed.

The Secretary reported, with reference to the complaint re Brosnahan, that he had spoken to Dr Reed, who stated that the reason for his nonadmission to the hospital was that he was under the influence of drink, and the hospital authorities were not expected to take any persons who were suffering from the effects of drink. Dr Reed had also desired him to ask the Board whether the present system should b 6 continued, whereby the responsibility of deciding what cases to admit was thrown on the surgeon. In this case, after Brosnahan was refused admission, he had been taken up by the police and removed to Napier gaol. The Chairman said it was proposed at Napier to set apart a place specially for the treatment of similar cases resulting from alcoholism. Mr Bibby expressed the opinion that some provision should be made for such cases.

The Secretary said there had been some trouble at other hospitals in connection with such cases, and shewed the members a copy of a petition prepared for an alteration of the law. The Chairman said there would be a new Hospital Bill next session, and this subject would have to be dealt with.

Mr Harding said he would be sorry to pass a resolution admitting such cases.

Mr Bibby moved that the admission of persons suffering from drink should be left to the doctor. The Chairman said that was the position now. The doctor wanted a resolution otherwise, —that they should decide either to admit or reject such cases.

The Board decided to leave the matter as before, in the hands of the doctor.

The subject of admission orders by members then cropped up, the Chairman remarking that he considered such orders simply waste paper. He had never refused to give an order for admission, for a member could not tell what might be deserving cases. Other members expressed the opinion that the necessity of procuring such orders eliminated a good many frivolous applications which would otherwise be put forward. A circular from the Auckland Hospital Board was read, inviting contributions to the estimated cost, £.139, of a test case in the Appeal Court to decide the liability of Boards for alleged neglect on the part of their surgeons.

The Chairman thought they could not legally use the Board’s funds for this purpose. He thought the cheapest course would have been to petition Parliament.

Mr Harding considered it desirable to have the matter tested. He was not sure’whether the members of the Board could be held personally liable in such cases. If a patient had a claim on the Board, then the BoarJ should have a claim on their doctor. He would like to contribute to the cost if the Board’s funds could be used for the purpose. Letter received, the Board deciding that their funds could not be so applied. The Secretary reported that some temporary provision, in the shape of a change of clothing, was often required for patients. This week there were twenty-seven. They often came in without any change of clothing, and it was some time before it could be procured from their friends. The Secretary was authorised to purchase a supply of clothing for such cases, cost not to exceed £3. Mr Groom said he had visited the hospital lately, and was struck by the very efficient way in which the various duties were discharged.

The Chairman said the convalescent patients were an excellent advertisement for the hospital, judging from the letters published in the papers lately, expressing satisfaction with the treatment they had received. On the motion of Messrs Groom and Harding, the Board passed a resolution expressive of their satisfaction with the satisfactory way in which the officers had carried out their duties during the past year. The Board then went into Committee to consider arrangements for the forthcoming concert and ball.