Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CORRESPONDENCE.

The Editor does not, necessarily, adopt the opinions expressed by correspondents. MONOKTON v. KUMAKA HOSPITAL COMMITTEE. [to the editor.] Sir—On perusing your report of the meeting of the subscribers to the Kuinara Hospital which appeared in your issue of the 14th inst., I observe that Mr Burger, one of the gentlemen who addressed the meeting, amongst other things said "He regretted to state Mr Lewis, who had the conducting of the defence for the committee, had not acted as they first wished him : that was to take evidence for the defence. If such a course bad been adopted he had no doubt that the judgment of the Court would not have been against the Committee." Now, sir, as these remarks may possibly have a tendency to lead the public to infer that I,

in direct opposition to the defendants wishes, refused to call evidence for the defence, I will, with your permission, and in order to remove any such impression, briefly state the facts, the correctness of which I have very little doubt will be admitted. . On the evening preceding the hearing of the case, Mr Burger and the defendants upon whom service of summonses had been effected held a private meeting at Kumara, when, after discussion and for reasons then urged by me, which M Burger and the other gentlemen will doubtless recollect, I advised that + the most judicious course would be not to call evidence, but simply rest the case on the legal construction of the written agreement between the doctor and the committee, in which suggestion both Mi Burger and the other defendants then concurred ; and I still consider they acted wiseh in adopting that course. In conclusion, I am really puzzled to know how Mr Burger could so boldly presume to assert that if evidence for the defence had been adduced, the judgment of the Court would not have been against the Committee. If, however, I am as capable as that gentleman of forming an opinion, and I think I am, I should certainly say I do not at all agree with him in that respect. . Regretting that Mr Burger s remarks should have impelled me to trespass on your valuable space, though I cannot believe his reflection on me was intentional, and am therefore inclined to take a liberal view and attribute the erroneous statements to his excitement over the meeting. Trusting you will be good enough, to insert the above —I am, &c., J. B. Lewis. Hokitika; 18th July, 1885.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/KUMAT18850720.2.11

Bibliographic details

Kumara Times, Issue 2754, 20 July 1885, Page 2

Word Count
417

CORRESPONDENCE. Kumara Times, Issue 2754, 20 July 1885, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE. Kumara Times, Issue 2754, 20 July 1885, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert