H.—3lb.

36

[t.. b. inglis-

mvle several attempts. Her septic condition got no worse in the isolation ward. The removal to the isolation ward was not in the slightest detrimental. The Hospital is not suitable for its purpose. I reported to this effect in the first year. Cross-examined.- —I gave orders myself for the disinfection of the isolation ward. Ido not know who did the actual wort. I had perfect confidence in the Matron that she would do it thoroughly. I know that you have been wanting an inquiry into St. Helens for some time. That had nothing to do with the destruction of the books. Re-examined.] Up to the 22nd October last this inquiry was not mooted. The books have been destroyed periodically. I knew they were destroyed in the first three years. I made no inquiries after that, as it was the usual custom. The destruction has gone on since without any protest from any one. [Mrs. Nicol states that she does not suggest that the books were destroyed in view of an inquiry. She states, further, that she is satisfied with Dr. Inglis's answer on the subject.] Adjourned till the 21st, at 10 a.m. Tuesday, 21st January, 1913. [Mrs. Nicol hands in further complaints re Mrs. Porch. Mrs. Nicol states that she has no further complaints to lodge.] Angelina Allen, recalled for cross-examination, saith. ' Cross-examined by Mr. Mays.] I was quite satisfied with my treatment by the Matron and the staff as far as I myself was concerned on both occasions. The tear in the which the Matron stitched up on the first occasion healed up all right. On each occasion when I left the Hospital I was in a fit condition to nurse a baby. lam sure the Matron told me to take the baby—when I took it back to the horne —to the chemist. The Matron told me to take the baby to a chemist, and if I did not find the child got on all right to take it to Dr. Sweet. I then had the child with me, and showed it to the Matron. I had not taken the child to a chemist before this. A chemist had not prescribed for the first child. I did not mention chemist at all to the Matron. I thought I would rather take the child to my own doctor than to Dr. Sweet. I did not know about the child being sore on the buttocks till the Matron told me on the day I was leaving. The Matron told me then that the child had diarrhoea. She told me to get some Fuller's earth, and make it into a paste and put it on. She gave me no other directions. I got and applied the Fuller's earth. The child was very cross and very greedy, as well as having the soreness and diarrhoea. To the Commissioner.] When I was discharged there was no discussion between me and the Matron or nurses about leaving my baby there. Ido not know if I would have left it if the Matron had wished me to leave it there for treatment. It did not enter into my mind at all to leave the baby at the home for treatment. Re-examined.] I am sure that the Matron told me to take the baby to the chemist, and not to a doctor. I knew before I left the home—on the day I left —of the raw buttocks and the green motions. I understood that when I was discharged the baby and I would have to come away together. Charlotta Ludwig, recalled, as to Mrs. Porch's case and Mrs. Allen's case. [Copy of Mrs. Porch's case from case-book put in. Exhibit No. 52.] To the Commissioner.] I recollect Mrs. Porch being admitted to the Hospital. That was on the 28th August, 1912. It was a case of protracted labour. Labour began at 1.30 a.m. on the 28th August. Ido not remember if I saw Mrs. Porch on her admission. There is no record kept of such. I saw the patient quite early in labour. When the patient first comes in she is prepared by a nurse. I select the nurse for that purpose. The preparation is done in the bathroom. The patient is taken next to the nursery, where she is watched, though not necessarily by the same nurse. It is the duty of the senior nurse on each duty to do the watching. Cross-examination-in-chief continued.] I cannot recollect at what hour I first saw Mrs. Porch. I saw her in the first stage of labour. I cannot say where or what nurse was with the patient when labour began. Dr. Goldstein was not sent for till the 30th August. He was not specially sent for. He was there on other cases, and I described the case to him. He instructed me to call him when it was time —that was, at the end of the first stage. I sent for him in due course. He came. He attended to the actual delivery of the child. From the beginning, I believe, Mrs. Porch's temperature rose. It did not come down. After a day or two she became strange in her manner. She was a little peculiar on the second day, and she got more strange as time went on. I think it was on the fourth day that she became violent and practically insane. She attempted to get out of the window. She was never left alone. After that time she refused to nurse her baby and to take food herself. On the" sixth or seventh day Dr. Frost reported the presence of streptococcus. At this time Mrs. Chamberlain was occupying the isolation ward. She (Mrs. Chamberlain) died on the 9th September. Mrs. Porch was on the labour-bed for some hours. They are usually put on the labour-bed at the end of the first stage. The patient was in room No. 8. There is nothing there beyond the hot-water bottle to keep the temperature up. There is no fireplace in the room. It was, I think, in the afternoon that she was put in the labour-bed. That was at the end of the first stage of the labour. It might have been at 1.30 p.m. on the 30th. She would be kept there till the end of the third stage. She would probably be kept there three or four hours. From the record she was four hours and twenty-five minutes on the labour-bed. The so-called labour-board is a bed kept rigid under the mattress with boards, with blankets and a hot-water bottle. It is specially kept for the purpose. Dr. Goldstein was present oV ; ig the greater part of the four hours and a half. I cannot say the temperature of the room. I