H.—22a

78

Dr. Collins: You have known me to do very difficult and trying work?— Yes. Have you always had confidence in my work?— Undoubtedly. You have heard it said that Wallis White had a 50-per-cent! chance of his life dissipated?— Yes. White was suffering from a duodenal ulcer. Would you take Sir Frederick Treves's word on such a case as an authority?— Undoubtedly. He says very few such cases are operated upon successfully: do you know if that is so?—I presume he is right. Would that contradict the assertion of a 50-per-cent. chance of life being lost?— Yes. Mr. McVeagh: If the mortality were more than 50 per cent., you will agree that it shows the necessity of the surgeou losing no time and using every care and skill in the operation?—AH other things being equal, time is of great importance, but what was of more primary importance was the proper cleansing of the peritoneum. If the mortality is 80 per cent. ?—My contention still holds good. It was no good getting the patient off the table simply to die of secondary peritonitis. You say you have made incisions in the intestines similar to those made in this case?—l have made incisions in the intestines, but I have not seen the incisions in this case. In this case two incisions were made in the colon, within 2 in. of each other. Have you ever done that?—l don't know that I have. If you found the appendix normal, have you in such a case opened the intestine in two places within 2 in. to remove scybalae?—l don't know if that has been done. It would be a legitimate course to pursue with the object of exploring the abdominal cavity. I could quite imagine some one opening the intestine within 2 in. Could you suggest why it was done?—l would suggest that possibly it was done because there was urging by some one else of the operation, who would perhaps do it because he was pushed for time and hadn't time to consider. Do you suggest any other reason?— While doing a thing it is difficult to find out exactly where you are and what you are doing. Witness, replying to another question, said that the apex of the appendix was often difficult to find. Dr. A. C. Purchas stated that he was formerly a member of the honorary staff. When he first went on the staff there was only one resident. After some time the Board appointed a second resident. The Board next decided to appoint a Medical Superintendent. The staff opposed this, and as the Board held to its decision and appointed a Superintendent (Dr. Floyd Collins) the staff resigned in a body. The Medical Association supported the staff on being called upon to fall into line with the staff. Mr. Reed: That was to boycott the Hospital? Dr. Roberton: May I object to Mr. Reed suggesting that the medical profession had decided to boycott anybody? The Chairman: It would be as well not to do so. Witness, proceeding with his evidence, gave a short history of the subsequent changes. In Dr. Baldwin's time, if the surgeon for the week was not available for an operation, the next in rotation was sent for Witness did not remember any case in which the Superintendent failed to get one of the honorary surgeons for an emergency operation. He considered all urgent surgical cases should be treated by the honorary staff. He did not regard a Medical Superintendent as desirable. The Hospital should be worked by junior residents under the honorary staff. He objected to annual appointments of the staff, and did not think the Board should have power to alter rules in this respect without refeience to some higher authority, such as the Inspector-General, When he was on the staff they had a very varied collection of members on the Board—undertakers, and all sorts. The Chairman : Undertakers ! Witness thought that men who might be looking after little trade pickings out of the Hospital should not be on the Board. Dr. Roberton: Are you serious in what you say?—l am afraid I am. Mr. Reed (laughing) : Do you suggest that in regard to undertakers? Witness complained of the position of the Costley Wards. He said that when the plans were prepared they were submitted to the honorary staff. The members of the staff, after spending a great deal of time in considering them, advised that the wards should be erected at the eastern end of the main building. They understood that the Board's architect agreed with them, but, to their surprise, the Board placed the wards in the present position. Witness after that left the staff in disgust. The Commission then adjourned. On Saturday, the 29th October, the Commission proceeded to the residence of Dr. Williams, at Mount Albert. Dr. Williams, examined by Mr. McVeagh, said he was three years on the honorary staff of tho Auckland Hospital, and was formerly in charge of Thames Hospital. He was on the staff of the Auckland Hospital in 1902, when the suppuration occurred. What is the general medical opinion with regard to those cases of suppuration?-—Some one generally has to shoulder the blame. Does it infer any want of care or skill?— Well, it practically means that there is a weak link in the chain. Do you experience the same thing with your cases outside?— Not to the same extent. I have had suppuration outside. I cannot claim to be perfect. It will occur from time to time.