CHARITABLE AID BOARD.

Globe, Volume XXI, Issue 1765, 16 October 1879, Page 3

CHARITABLE AID BOARD.

The ordinary meeting of tho Hospital and Charitable Aid Board was held yesterday afternoon, at four o’clock. Present —Mr Thompson, chairman, and Messrs Ick, Brown, and the secretary, Mr March. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. Mr Brown asked if anything further had l been done regarding the minute-book. The Chairman said the secretary had spoken to Dr. Byrnes on the subject. Mr March said Dr. Byrnes said they had a minute-book, but he did not know whether it was issued by Government, and he (the secretary) having looked at it, came to the conclusion that it was not a regular minute-book, and appeared to refer only to matters pertaining to the staff. The Chairman stated that Dr. Brins—a member of the staff—had been seriously indisposed, but was recovering, also Mr Booth had been absent owing to illness. The Hospital committee reported— That during the past fortnight twenty-one patients had been admitted into the _ Hospital, and twenty-two discharged, leaving sixty patients in the institution. During the same period there were three deaths. The committee having been informed that one of the patients who died had been a member of one of the benevolent institutions which had been paying him a regular allowance under the impression he was contributing so much to the Hospital, it has been resolved that in future the house steward will ascertain when patients are admitted whether they are members of benefit societies, and if so, will request the society to pay the allowance for their maintenance direct to him. The report was adopted. The report of the house steward was read, and referred to the house committee. On the motion of Mr Brown, seconded by Mr Ick, it was resolved that application be made to the Colonial Secretary for whatever prison labor might be required to make alterations in the Hospital grounds. The acting house surgeon, Mr E. Pridgeon, submitted a report, in which he stated the number of patients admitted and discharged during the past fortnight, and the number remaining in the Hospital, as quoted above. He further stated that the condition of the Hospital was in every way satisfactory. The attendance of the medical staff had been regular up to the unfortunate illness of Dr. Prins, whose place as surgeon is being temporarily filled by Dr. Campbell. The report was adopted. A letter was read from Dr. Townend, in reference to the case of Samuel S. Baldwin, deceased, who had been placed under his (Dr. Townend’s) care, and who died at the Hospital on the 6th inst. On the day following a Coroner’s inquest was held, and Dr. Coward, the Coroner, called in another medical practitioner, unconnected with the Hospital, and directed him to make the necessary post mortem examination, utterly ignoring the fact of his having been in attendance upon the case, and not troubling himself to ascertain what his opinions as to the cause of death may have been. He thought it was only right, in the interests of tho institution, that this matter should bo investigated by the Board. The Chairman said the subject referred to was of importance, as involving a principle. He thought there could be no doubt that Dr. Townend should have received notice. Mr Brown pointed out that clause 21 of the Coroners Act put the question beyond doubt, by providing that where a medical practitioner had been in attendance upon a man as to whose death an inquiry was held, such medical practitioner only should be called in, and, in other oases, some medical man resident near to the scene of the inquiry should bo summoned. Mr Ick moved—“ That the letter of Dr. Townend bo forwarded to the Colonial Secretary, whoso attention should be directed to it.”

The motion was seconded by Mr Brown and carried.

Tho next business before the Board wns the question of charges levelled against the Board by members of the late medical staff, which had boon submitted to the Government, who again referred the matter to the Board, with a request for further information. The following statement, drawn up by authority of the Board, in answer to the charges made, was then road : ‘ Board room, Christchurch Hospital, 15th October, 1879. Sir, —Referring to my letter of the 2nd instant, I have tho honor to inform you that the Hospital and Charitable Aid Board has had under its consideration a copy of a letter, containing grave charges against the Board, which has been addressed to the Government by a number of medical practitioners residing in Christchurch, who, at various times, have been connected with tho Hospital. The Board takes this opportunity of thanking the Hon. Colonial Secretary for lus courtesy in furnishing it with a copy of said letter, and at tho same time to express its regret that the practitioners in question should have thought that they had any cause for complaint against tho Board in relation to its dealings with tho late Hospital staff. The Board learns with surprise that its administration “of tho Hospital is so extremely unsatisfactory.” The mere assertion of any number of medical practitioners doe? not neoeai

sarily make it so, and the entire absence of i evidence in support of their' allegations the Board believes to be strong grounds for assumfijy that they had none to offer. The chairman of Ithe late staff, Dr. Turnbull, is a member of the Board, and also a member of the house committee, whose' administration he himself condemns, and his silence at the Board on this subject places him in this dilemma —either that the administration was not “ unsatisfactory,” or he has failed in his duty to the public. In addition to this the Board has the recent voluntary admission of Dr. Turnbull that no mistakes had been made with respect to the administration of the business of the Hospital. The Board is not aware of any single act which justifies the medical practitioners in asserting that they were forced into strong antagonism with the Board, on the contrary every matter of a professional character was referred to the staff, and their recommendations invariably adopted. Every member of the Board has readily acknowledged the material services which the late staff rendered to the Hospital in giving their attendance gratuitously, but at the same time the Board is not insensible of the great prestige and other advantages accruing to the staff from the privilege of practising at that institution. The Board is pleased to learn that the late staff “initiated and carried out important reforms in the lay management of the institution resulting in a large saving to the colony, because it was not previously aware of the fact, and it is a matter of great regret that the Board is unable to give the Government any information on the subject of these important reforms, in consequence of the late staff not having kept any minutes of their proceedings. See appendix A. The Board is not aware of the nature of the recommendations which the staff made to the Government, but it has no hesitation in asserting that the present Board does not owe its existence to their recommendations, although the staff’s management of the institution might have made such a step an absolute necessity. Copies of telegrams are attached between the Bon. Colonial Secretary and the late Mayor of Christchurch, which clearly di-prove the truth of tbeir assertion that “ in accordance with our recommendation a Board was called into existence.” See appendix B. Of the charges against a member of the Board, Mr J. E. Brown, some are simply exaggerations, while others are gross misrepresentations. The allusion to Mr Brown becoming a member of the Board would lead to the supposition that he had been a late addition, whereas he was one of the original members appointed by the Government. Ths Board most emphatically deny the assertion that Mr Brown “ availed himself of every opportunity to asperse the whole of the profession,” or that his manner in moving any resolution affecting the status of the late staff was “ most offensive,” in proof of which see extract from report of proceedings taken from the “ Lyttelton Times,” March 6th, 1879. See appendix C. Mr Brown neither immediately after his appointment, nor at any other time, tabled a resolution having for its object the removal from the Hospital of a staff which every member of the Board, Mr Brown himself included, confessed had discharged their duties in a most satisfactory manner. A resolution was tabled by Mr Brown on the 30th January, 1879, seven months after the appointment of the Board, and was to the following effect —“ That the Colonial Secretary be advised to cancel the appointments of the present medical staff of the Hospital, with a view to the Board inviting offers from duly qualified medical men resident in Christchurch for attendance at the Hospital for ensuing year.” The reasons why such a resolution was brought forward and adopted by the Board are these: —The Board had been told by the chairman of the late staff. Dr. Turnbull. that it was only a temporary body; that it had no right to make appointments, without the consent of the Government —that the staff did not acknowledge the authority of the Board, it never having been gazetted ; that the staff had been appointed for life on good behaviour; that the staff would not accept any appointment under the Board, and much more to the same purpose. In the face of such statements the Board had no alternative but to request the Colonial Secretary to cancel the appoinment of the staff, not for the object, as stated, of getting rid of them, but simply that the Board might make the appointments and thus put an end to the absurdity of having two governing bodies in the same institution. Besides, at a conference held in November last between the Hon. Colonial Secretary and the Board, a rather animated discussion took place on this subject, particularly between the Hon. the Colonial Secretary and Dr. Turnbull, when tbe latter gentleman said that the staff would not permit any other medical man to enter within the walla of the Hospital, that they would fight the Government, the Board, and the public in the matter. The Colonial Secretary then said, Do I understand Dr. Turnbull to say that he considers the present staff have an exclusive right to the Hospital ? Dr. Turnbull replied, Yes. The Colonial Secretary then said it was time the Government considered the status of the staff, and asked the Board to consider the whole question of Hospital staff appointments. The Board considered that it would have been of no avail to formally consult the staff on Mr Brown’s resolution, as Dr. Turnbull, ths representative of the staff, had given the Board to understand that they would brook no interference with their position in the Hospital. The staff did not “ resign in consequence of Mr Brown’s invective against the whole profession,” but requested the Government to cancel their appointments after an unsuccessful effort to induce the Government to extend the term of their appointments till January Ist. 1880.

It ia evident that the whole of the medical profession did not consider Mr Brown’s action towards them “ offensive,” from the fact that no less than five of the profession offered their services and were appointed as a new staff, two of whom (Drs. Ellis and Patrick) have since resigned, not for any complaint they have against the Board but in consequence of a difference of opinion with their colleague. Dr. Campbell, on a point of medical The Board is at a loss to understand how a dispute with Dr. Campbell, ou a point of medical etiquette, could have induced Drs Ellis and Patrick to have joined the “ medical practitioners ” in their charges against the Board, more especially when it is remembered that they accepted office on the new staff, and thereby virtually acknowledged that the position taken by the Board was the correct one. The Government acceded to the request of the Board, and applications were accordingly invited from duly qualified medical men willing to give their services to the Hospital for the ensuing year. Eleven applications were received, but previous to opening them the Board proceeded to_ determine the number of the staff. In the discussions which had previously taken place on the same subject, the chairman of the late staff (Dr. Turnbull) stated that three practitioners were enough and four ample, which, was confirmed by the House Surgeon, and the Board being of a similar opinion, decided to reduce the number of the staff from nine to five. The chairman of the late staff (Dr. Turnbull) endeavoured to have the number fixed at six, a rather singular proceeding, considering the advice he gave the Board only a few weeks before, ‘that three were enough and four ample,’ but when the applications'wero opened and six of them were found to contain nothing more than blank sheets of paper, and on a closer examination the envelopes were found to be marked * Tender for Hospital Staff,’ then the singularity disappears in the suspicion that some unscrupulous person or persona had attempted to perpetrate a joke on a singularly unsuitable subject, viz., the care of the sick, the helpless, and the unfortunate. The Board ia of opinion that the paragraph reflecting on a Mr Townend, “ whom, although legally qualified, the profession have never recognised, in consequence of his advertising himself after the manner of a small tradesman,” requires but little comment. As a specimen of that kindly professional “ consideration” which the late staff appears on all occasions to have demanded, and “conduct calculated to lower the status of the profession,” no better illustration could be given. The former part of the paragraph, that the Board called for tenders, and were able only to secure a Mr Townend, however, is deficient in rather an essential element to make it effective—its want of veracity, and no member of the profession knows better than Dr. Turnbull that the statement is untrue, and that the Board could have secured another member on the staff had it been considered necessary. The next paragraph, except the first line, is an entire misrepresentation. Ist. The chairman of the Board never stated anything of the kind as that attributed to him, 2nd. At the time referred to tha staff consisted of only two members, not three; and 3rd. The Board could have increased the number of the staff, as the whole of the profession had not declined to serve with them. The Board is aware that opinions for and against the staff have appeared in tho_ local papers, but it cannot admit that an article or two, or a few letters, really represent public opinion. The Board has reason to believe that public opinion ia almost entirely in its favor, and it has no hesitation in asserting that the institutions under its control were never better administered than at present. Beal reforms have been introduced into the administration of the Hospital without impairing its efficiency, and although the staff is greatly reduced in number, the Board ia satisfied that the patients receive the utmost care and attention. (See extract from house surgeon’s report attached.) The Beard is satisfied that the explanations and statements which it has felt it its duty to make, with the accompanying documents in support thereof, will enable the Government to perceive that the charges preferred by “ some of the medical practitioners of Christchurch” are entirely without foundation. It was resolved to adopt the statement, and forward copies of it to members ol the Board now in 'Wellington, and the representatives of Canterbury in Parliament. The Board then adjoumedU