THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2733, 30 March 1916, Page 4

THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL

The differences of opinion which have arisen on the Hospital Board concerning the use of the-upper story of the Children's Hospiial building for ophthalmic cases are not difficult to understand. The facts of the positiori which are set out in our news columns show clearly enough that there are two points of view from which tho general situation may bo reasonably'considered. The first of these is the "needs of. tho moment. Space, we are told, is wanted for ophthalmic cases, in order to relieve the pressure on tho main hospital, and space'can only be obtained in two Ways. The first of these is to borrow and build, and this the chairman of the board and some of his fellowmembers, with some reason, think undesirable under existing conditions. The second is to use, temporarily, the portion of the children's ward not at present required for children's cases, and apparently not likely to be required for some time to come. Tho latter course has been decided on by tho board by one voto. Those who oppose this course are governed by principle and by sentiment. They object to the Children's Hospital, or any part of it, being used for other than children's cases, on, the. ground that to do so would be to commit a breach of faith with tho public who subscribed the money for the building on the clear understanding that it was for the use and benefit of the little ones alone. Mils.Wilford and the Rev. H. van Staveren, and others who hold this view, are cm very strong ground on the question .of principle." Money_ subscribed by the public for a definite purpose jannot bo diverted from that purpose without shaking the confidence of the public and prejudicing future appeals to public generosity. It is ea.fe to say that many, probably the majority, of those who interested themselves in, or subscribed to, the funds for the erection of a Children's Hospital would not have assisted or contributed to advance a scheme for a general hospital. It was the special, nature of the appeal that won for it'the success attained. Therefore, even though the whole of the ' Children's Hospital building may not be required at the moment for children's cases, very strong reasons must be advanced to warrant its use for other purposes. Most people no doubt will sympathise with the viqw of the chairman of the board that it is undesirable at the present time to embark on any but absolutely necessary building expenditure; but if an ophthalmic ward is urgently required, and has been required for years, as one member stated, then the proper course to take is to ascertain the cost, and see if it is'prohibitive. •' It should be quite time enough to think of taking a portion of the Children's Hospital for the purpose proposed when all other means of meeting the situation have been tried and failed, i '