24

H.—22a

breast from the 19th May till the 9th August, when my suspension was brought about. Would it have been possible for you and Dr. Collins to work satisfactorily together in the Hospital?—lf Dr. Collins kept in his right place it would have been. That is, subordinate to you?—He should be subordinate to the honorary staff. When were you first dissatisfied with Dr. Collins's surgery?—l don't remember. When did you join the honorary staff?— Some time in March or April, in 1903. " ~.„■,.,, Can you say, then, when you first became dissatisfied with the surgery work?—l can't exactly say when. I knew he was not a brilliant surgeon. I did not think he was the best surgeon in Auckland. When did you become dissatisfied? —I expressed dissatisfaction officially when I raised this trouble. For twelve months as honorary surgeon you were satisfied?—l raised no complaint about his surgery. Were you satisfied or dissatisfied?—lt is very hard to think of any instance. You haven't a clear enough recollection whether you were dissatisfied until the White case?—He did his casualty work very well. I ask about his surgery generally?—l can't say that I saw him doing abdominal surgery, except in one case, in which Dr. Lewis stood over him. Mr. Reed continued to press the question on Dr. Neil as to the date when he became dissatisfied, but the witness persisted in stating that he could not give a definite opinion. He admitted writing a letter, at the direction of the honorary staff, while he filled the position of secretary, transmitting recommendations to the Hospital Board, in which the following extract occurred: "The honorary staff are of opinion that the suggestion as regards the emergency surgery is an excellent one. For some time past the serious emergency work has, in the absence of the surgeon for the week, been performed by the Senior Medical Officer, to the entire satisfaction of the honorary staff." Dr. Neil said he was also a member of the honorary staff at that time, but he said it was the intention of the staff to refer to the casualty surgery work. Mr. Reed: Do you swear that was intended as a distinction?—l took it that was the meaning I had to convey. How is it that no such distinction was made in your letter?— Dr. Collins would not have had the emergency work in full swing by that time. Do you say .that before that letter Dr. Collins had not done abdominal work?—l saw him only on one case under the inspection and supervision of Dr. Lewis. Do you say he only performed the one?—No, I don't say that. You said earlier in the day that Dr. Collins had done twenty abdominal cases, and nineteen had been done before March?—l did not intend to convey that meaning. What do you mean, then ?—That letter was a reply to a letter from the Chairman of the Board, asking for the staff's opinion in regard to the appointment of assistant surgeons who would take away the casualty work from the residents. Mr. Reed then produced a copy of the Chairman's letter, which was published in the Herald of the Bth March, 1904, and contained the following extract: "It has been claimed by some that the assistant surgeon should take the operations when the honorary surgeon is absent. With this I most emphatically disagree. Instead of such a Erocedure, T should much prefer to know that, in the absence of the onorary surgeon, the Senior Medical Officer, who is responsible to the Board, should operate, being assisted by the assistant surgeon. In other words, when the honorary surgeon for the week could not be present, then the Senior Medical Officer should take his place." The Chairman said the copy could not be put m, except in the legal way, and providing Dr. Neil swore positively that the copy was an exact and true one of the communication received by the honorary staff from the Chairman. Dr. Neil said he could not swear it was a correct copy, and Mr. McVeagh intimated that he would like to read the letter ; and also confer with his client in regard to it during the luncheon adjournment. The matter was allowed to pass. Mr. Reed: You were telling us yesterday the different positions you had held. Were you ever at the Dunedin Hospital?— Yes. While there did you have a similar dispute as this?—No, I had not. You had no dispute on leaving the Dunedin Hospital?—l don't remember. Was not your leaving the Dunedin Hospital due to the dispute you had?— That is entirely false. Did you have any dispute with the officials?—No, I did not. I received testimonials from members of the staff and others, and most cordially said good-bye. This is an insinuation that there was something, and you should bring it out. Make a direct charge. It is a false insinuation you are making. I don't make an insinuation, but I have been instructed that you left in consequence of a dispute?— That is absolutely false. Dr. Neil later on again referred to this matter, and repeated that the insinuation was an unwarrantable one. He exhibited his watchchain, which he said was given to him when he left the Hospital at Dunedin. It was, he said, the only chain of the kind given by the Hospital staff for the past twenty-one years. To make such an insinuation, when it was absolutely false, was very wrong.