DR THACKER’S CHARGES.

Hokitika Guardian, 25 February 1918, Page 3

DR THACKER’S CHARGES.

FINDING OF THE COURT

WH ITK-WASIIING' REPORT

[/.'kit Pit ESS ASSOCIATION. COPYHIGHT.

WELLINGTON. This Day. 'flic report of the Court of .Enquiry into Dr Thacker’s complaining telegram to tile Minister of Defence was sent on November loth hut only two bases which had occurred before that date were brought up, and these unjustified the allegations that medical

examiners had been insulting. These were the cases of Woods and R urrow. Two other cases, Men unity and Cooper, were of trivial material. All those four men were ’ apparently

J antagonistic to the medical examiners, j Concerning E'miiuniols complaint of the laxity of the medical examiners in not subjecting him to further medical examination ,to corroborate the medij cal certificate, such as was accepted j by thorn, the Court is of opinion that j the examination was adequate and the classification was made in good faith. 'Regarding Burrows, who complained that he was arrested while on sick leave .and ordered not to visit Dr. Thacker, and being threatened solitary 'onnlinomoiit if he did so, although the Court was of the opinion that

jMacGibhon may have exceeded his nowers, in ordering him not to visit Dr. Thacker, nevertheless it considers the order did not constitute an insult. Regarding the alleged threat of solitary confinement,- Burrows saul MacGibbon made it a stipulation that if lie promised not to visit. Dr. Thacker he would he released from detention. This statement has not been refuted and the Court is of opinion that Burrows was justified in assuming that the stipulation constituted a threat. Regarding McNamara, this man was obviously of a. high strung nervous temperament and the Court suggests that Fitzgerald was ill-advised in making audible asides to his colleagues some of which might he misconstitn-! ted. Tf the regulations do not per., init Medical examining Boards asking reservists their name, Fitzgerald was wrong in doing so in this case. The i report concludes that we consider ‘(many reservists appear before the medical examiners armed with certificates which they have been persuaded will exempt them from further examination and liability for military service. When they discover such is not the case they are inclined to believe that they have a grievance against the medical examination.

This, apparently in certain cases has bleen fomented by the interference of Dr Thacker, whose conduct as an officer may be regarded as subversive of military discipline, as in the (t;ase of Budrows, where he himself failed to report the matter to the district headquarters, hut instead, sent a telegram to General Henderson.