H.—22a

68

It has been suggested that Dr. Collins was overworked, and had all these things thrust on him?—l can't say. Dr. Inglis said when he was in charge he always produced the consultation-book and had it signed at each consultation. Lately the book was written up and signed some time after the consultations had been held. Since the inquiry held at the Hospital by Dr. MacGregor he had been asked to sign the book to a consultation held before the inquiry. It was far better to sign the book at the time of the consultation. Mr. Reed : Do you approve of the method adopted in some of the English hospitals of having a highly paid manager, without any medical training, to act as administrator?—l think that would work better. in one of the leading London hospitals they have a non-medical manager at £1,000 a year, who was formerly manager of a soapworks. What do you think of such an arrangement?—lt would depend on what the duties were. Do you think the honorary staff could manage the Hospital with the assistance of juniors?— Yes; a secretary at the Hospital and two, or possibly three, juniors would do. Continuing, witness said that in his time he did most of the administrative work. The medical adviser did not interfere much. He understood that the arrangement was satisfactory. He did not know of any particular complaints as to there being no one on the premises with sufficient experience to perform major operations, but on returning from a holiday he found that the system had fallen into disrepute. On being questioned as to the honorary staff's recommendations (as embodied in Dr. Pentreath's letter), witness said he thought the staff was coerced into that position. If the Board said practicaliy that the Senior Medical Officer must be on the staff, of course they would carry it through. With regard to delirium-tremens and consumptive cases ? he always tried to isolate them, but it was difficult to do this in entirety, especially in regard to female patients, owing to the lack of accommodation. The septicaemia cases were usually kept separate. The Commission then adjourned. Dr. Inglis, who had been called the previous day, continued his evidence under cross-examination by Dr. Collins on Thursday, the 27th October. He considered he was in charge of the Hospital when Senior Medical Officer, but his position was never defined. Dr. Bedford was medical adviser, and attended the Board meetings. At the time witness was recommended to fill the position now occupied by Dr. Collins he did not think Rule 72, relating to emergency work, was in force. Routine work of the Hospital had been interfered with by the irregularity of visits of the staff. He put up fractures while he was in charge, and attended them afterwards under the honorary staff. The house physician assisted at operations, attended fever patients, and carried out post-mortems, but the work was so arranged as to minimise any risk of infection. When a bad case came to the Hospitaf and the two residents were engaged on an operation, one of the residents left the operation, either at once or at a convenient time. In reply to Dr. Roberton, witness said the Hospital Board had too many institutions to look after at present; they had no medicai knowledge, and the members were elected for too short a period. The effect of annual elections of the Board prevented members from taking a proper interest in the work, and also tended to make a continuity of policy impossible. When witness was in charge all the members of the Board did not frequent the Hospital sufficiently to gain a thorough knowledge of the working of the institution. Mr. Bruce and Mr. Stichbury, as successive Chairmen, were often there, and showed a real interest in the institution. Mr. Gordon also attended pretty often. The Fees Committee were also often there. There had been a difficulty with two resident surgeons in taking in patients, but he did not think there should be any difficulty with three residents. He objected to persons able to pay for outside treatment being admitted to the Hospital, as it took away beds for the sick poor, and was unfair to ratepayers and taxpayers. It was also unfair to the honorary staff to ask them to treat patients in the Hospital who were m a position to pay for outside treatment. It was also unfair to the nursing-homes. He had frequently heard it stated by patients that they were too poor to go to the Hospital. He had told them in some cases that the Board wculd probably remit the fees, but they had replied that they would not care to make a request for remission. Were they Scotch folk?— Some of them. (Laughter.) Witness, continuing, said that in many cases patients, after going to the Hospital, had their recovery retarded by worrying over the fees, and in many cases they left before they were really fit to do so. He thought the tenure of office of the honorary staff should be for a longei term, and he approved of the idea of assistant surgeons. With proper precautions there should be no danger in the physician who attended to ordinary infectious cases giving anaesthetics. He did not approve of the Senior Medical Officer being present at all the meetings of the honorary staff. He should be there by invitation. His presence at all meetings tended to restrain discussion, and also placed himself in an invidious position. He did not approve of the Senior Medical Officer, as a subordinate, being the only means of communication between the staff and the Board. He did not think the Senior Medical Officer should do any operations. Casualty work should be done by the junior residents under the supervision of the Senior Medical Officer, who should be really a Medical Superintendent. There were more medical than surgical emergencies, and there was no reason at all why the