THE ARROW.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Volume II, Issue 73, 9 January 1864, Page 6

THE ARROW.

i FROM Ol'R OWN CORRESPONDENT., Friday, January Bth. A case exciting much public interest, as connected with the affairs of the district hospital, was brought before Lowther Broad, Esq., R.M., at the Arrow, on Wednesday last—John Kirk, late house-steward of the hospital, summoning Thomas H. Brown, the treasurer of that institution, for the recovery of £l9 6s 8d; the items of that amount being £2 for brandy supplied to the Committee, £2 ' 15s for blankets withheld from plaintiff, and £l4 lis 8d for one month's salary, at the rate of £ 175 per year, in lieu of notice which the plaintiff assumed should have been given him prior to his late dismissal. The plaintiff, in stating his case, entered into a long rambling narration of events connected with his duties as house-steward, and alleged that he had been in the habit of supplying the committee and their friends with refreshments on their occasional visits to the hospital. On the day of the late election he received orders from some individual members of the committee to supply them with brandy. He sent to Frankton for sundry bottles, the greater part of the contents of which the committee and their friends consumed. He had paid for the brandy from his own pocket, but could not recollect who asked him to supply it; knew it was some of the committee, but could not state their names. As to the blankets, the plaintiff swore that he brought them with him to the hospital, and described them as being marked with droppings from sperm candles. On ap- \ plying for the blankets at the hospital, he was | told he would get none, and he had not re- \ ceived them up to the present time. The claim for wages in lieu of notice, plaintiff contended he was entitled to, inasmuch as he | had been dismissed wrongfully from his situa- j tion, and that the charges of dishonesty and drunkenness brought against him by certain ] members of the committee, as reasons for his dismissal, were false and unfounded.

In answer to Mr. Campbell, solicitor for the defendant. Kirk admitted that it was his duty to receive all orders from the Secretary of the Hospital, but that officer had given him no orders to obtain the brandy in question, nor could he produce any receipts showing that he had paid for the liquor; he admitted that the accounts he had presented to the Committee for audit were not correct, but endeavored to account for that fact by stating that he was suffering from illness, and made them up hurriedly ; he had omitted to enter some items of money received from the patients, but alleged that he also had omitted to take credit for certain sums expended on behalf of the Hospital, which he imagined would square his debtor and creditor account. He also admitted that 011 entering on his situation as house-steward, he had not signed any agreement as to notice of dismissal or resignation being given or taken on either side. For the defence, the defendant, Mr. T. H. Brown, stated that the plaintiff had never received any order from himself or the Secretary to supply the brandy 011 the day of the election, and* if he had Gone so it was at plaintiff's own risk As to the blankets, he had made particular enquiries at the Hospital, and could not find that the plaintiff had brought any there, or had become possessed of any as his own property whilst there. He disputed the claim of £l4 lis. Bd. for wages, as the plaintiff had been dismissed upon proved charges of drunkenness and dishonesty. He stated that all the servants of the Hospital held their appointments subject to their good conduct, and were liable to dismissal for misconduct at any time without notice. Another instance had occurred since the opening of the Hospital, in which a servant had been dismissed without notice, and who had not been paid any money in lieu of such notice, nor had the servant in question made a claim since for compensation. I he cause of Kirk being discharged arose from it having been proved to the Committee that he was guilty of embezzlement and drunkenness, and had on various occasions neglected his duties; he himself had seen Kirk intoxicated, and considered the Committee had ample reason for summarily dismissing him. Dr. Croft, the Secretary, Messrs. Beetham, Bracken, M'Gaw, Murphy, and Dr. Pelley, evidence fully corroborating the testimony of the defendant, and proved that plaintiff when called upon to render an account of his stewardship had prevaricated in his statements, and had produced confused cash accounts; had failed to account for various sums received from the patients, and on his dismissal had refused to give up the kevs of the Hospital until police force had been called in to compel him to do so. Dr. Pelley also proved that the plaintiff, previous to entering on his duties at the Hospital had slept at the house at Frankton he occupied, and he then had no blankets, and that he ''Dr. Pelley) lent him blankets from the Hospital stores, and that to the best of his

knowledge the plaintiff never had any blankets of his own whilst in the Hospital.

! The evidence and cross-examinations occu- ! pied several houi s, at the conclusion of which I Mr. Campbell, addressing the Bench, drew | attention to the evidence, contradicting the I statement of the plaintiff, and stated that the members of the Committee who had appeared as witnesses had not done so to dispute any just claim against the Hospital, but to resist an evident attempt at extortion, vindictively brought forward by Kirk in consequence of being discharged from his situation. His Worship dismissed the case, with costs for defendant, his counsel, and witnesses. Thomas Hughes then endeavoured to recover from T. 11. Brown, as Treasurer of the Hospital, a sum of money for wages as night watchman in the garden of the Hospital, but failed to prove that he had been engaged by defendant, he having in fact been engaged by Kirk, the house steward. Evidence was brought forward to prove that Kirk had offered to cultivate and take care of the garden, with the assistance of the convalescent patients of the Hospital, and without the expense of hired labor ; he had, however, engaged plaintiff to work in the garden, and the Committee had allowed one claim for wages, but with the distinct understanding i that no other claim would be recognized, and had instructed him not to engage any more hired labor. Kirk had engaged Hughes again, and the defendant refused to recognize the claim now made, contending that Kirk alone was accountable. Judgment in this case was also given for defendant Kirk then sued Dr. Pelley for certain sums of money expended by him in spirits, &c., for Dr. Pelley's use, giving him credit for £2, cash received from defendant. Dr. Pelley denied having ordered or received the liquor, and stated that the £2 referred to included £l the plaintiff had borrowed from him, ! and £ 1 the plaintiff had kept out of money j entrusted to his care; he admitted having himself borrowed ten shillings from the plain- j tiff, which consequently left Kirk thirty shil- ; lings in his debt. He denied having made j any appointment to pay plaintiff the mouey, and stated that any spirits supplied him by | the plaintiff was by the plaintiff's own free will, and not at his request, he never questioning the plaintiff as to where he obtained the liquor from. The evidence on both sides was conflicting, and his Worship observed that it was merely a case of one man's oath against another, and the plaintiff having prevaricated iu his testimony in the former case, he placed the greater credence in Dr. Pelley's statement, and therefore dismissed the case. Kirk was hereupon requested to pay the fees and expenses in the preceding actions, and the money not being forthcoming, he was at once placed in durance vile. ♦ WAKATIP DISTRICT HOSPITAL. COMMITTEE MEETING. January 7th, 1864. Present —Messrs Rees (President), Richmond, Lockhart, Mirfin, Douglas, Bracken, Melody, Brown, O'Callaghan, Gordon, and Dr. Croft. Minutes of last meeting were read and confirmed. Received from patients in the Hospital the sum of £lO 10s. Received the sum of £1 from Archibald Anderson, Arrow, being annual subscription. Correspondence read and received: — 7th January, 1864. Sir,—l beg to enclose herewith the Hospital returns for the past three weeks. I would respectfully call your attention to the unsatisfactory manner in which the contract for the supply of bread is being carried out by Messrs Duncan and Lamb. On the 21st ultimo the nine loaves received by me weighed only 32§ lbs. and on the following day a like number weighed lbs. there being a deficiency of 6 lbs on 18 loaves. The weights have since been correct (excepting six loaves received on the 2nd instant, which were 1 lb deficient) but they are not unfrequently made up with broken pieces of bread. I have to bring under your notice the following particulars of two patients lately discharged. Peter Byrne, admitted into Hospital on the 31st October, suffering from fracture of the fibula, the result of an assault committed on him by Mr J. Roche, of the United States Hotel, j Queenstown. This patient was discharged on the j 17th ult, and during his stay in Hospital—a period of 7 weeks—paid nothing towards his support: he obtained £lO damages, and costs, from Mr Roche, at the Police Court, Queenstown.

William K. Johnson, admitted on the Bth November and discharged on the 17th December, paid the entrance fee only. This patient, I understand, is in very good circumstances, and proprietor of the Sandhurst Hotel, Bendigo, Victoria. He admitted his ability to pay something towards his expenses for the period he had been in the Hospital—4o days—but stated that he had not the money with him, that he would send it to me in a few days. Up to this date he has failed to do so: he resides with his brother-in-iaw, Mr R. Canavan, at the Victoria Hotel, Arrow.

i I would also bring under your notice the irre- ; gular manner in which patients are recommended for admission to the Hospital by some of the j members of Committee, and by Mr J. M. Ryan, 1 of Queenstown, as the accompanying recommenj dations will shew, in nearly all cases—no men- | tion is made of the patient's ability or otherwise j to pay the usual fees. It would be more satisfactory if Rule 9 was observed, and if members of c ommittee would invariably state whether the j patient whom they may recommend is able to pay I the entrance fee or not, and, in the case of paying ; patients, the amount they will be able to pay j weekly. j I regret being under the necessity of reporting | the frequent absence of Dr. Pelley from his ; duties—away either at Queenstown or the Arrow. During Christmas week, for three consecutive ; nights and the greater part of each day, he was absent from the institution ; and on two of the j occasions it was not until the following day that II was made aware of his whereabouts. i I enclose some forms in use in the Melbourne Hospital, transmitted by Mr James Williams, the : Superintendent of that Institution, but regret ; that the Articles of Agreement entered into with ! successful tenderers has not accompanied them. ! The well has been completed: a few feet of rope is required to enable us to work both buckets, i and the sand and gravel around the well requires ! to be removed. | I beg to remain, Sir, Your most obedient servant, Alex. M'lntosh, Wardsman and Acting House Steward. P.S.—The services of two men is required in the garden for a week, to cover the potatoes. The President, Board of Management. 1 Treasurer's Office, Dunedin, 31st December, 1863. Sir, —I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of yours of the 23rd inst, and No. 279, 1863. The cursory glance I have only given to the documents merely enables me to express my satisfaction with the manner in which they have been framed, but precludes me from returning the bank pass book till next mail. I have great pleasure in authorising you to place the amount forwarded to you, as the Government subsidy, to the credit of the Hospital Committee, and to express the satisfaction the Government feel in taking notice of the marked liberality of the inhabitants of your district. I have, &c., (Signed) John D. Gillies, Provincial Treasurer. Mr Warden Beetham, Queenstown. The hon. secretary brought up the following report of attendance : Attendance of Members from sth November, 1863 (Five Meetings). Dr Croft has attended . 5 meetings M'Gaw „ . 4 „ Brown „ . 5 „ O'Callaghan (disqualified) . 1 „ Lockhart (absent on subpoena) . 2 ~ Gordon „ . 4 „ Richmond (disqualified) . 1 „ Healey „ . 4 ~ Bracken „ . 5 ~ Mirfin ~ . 4 „ Smith (disqualified) .1 „ Melody (disqualified) . 2 „ Mendershausen (disqualified) . 1 „ Dr Douglas (absent upon sub.). 2 „ R. F. Williamson „ . 3 „ Spensley (absent on subpoena) . 0 „ Pritchard (do) .1 „ Beetham „ . 3 „ Rees „ . 5 ~ H. Manders, Assistant Sec. Queenstown, 31st Dec., 1863. Ordered to write to Messrs. Duncan and Lamb, regarding the short weight, &c., of their bread. It was resolved that no patient should be admitted without previously paying an entrance fee or contributing to the funds of tlie institution. The house steward's report was fully considered. Dr. Pelley was called in, and asked why he absented himself from the Hospital contrary to the Rules and Regulations. Dr. Pelley confessed he had broken the j Rules. Dr. Douglas proposed —" That Dr. Pelley's notice should be drawn to the breach of the Hospital Rules which he has committed, and that he should be recommended not to commit such again." Seconded by Dr. Croft. Lost. Amendment moved by Messrs. Gordon and Mirfin —" That Dr Pelley's attention be called to the Rules of this Hospital, and that if such occurrence be brought before the Committee of Management respecting the neglect of his duties again, they will suspend him at once." Carried. Proposed by Mr. Lockhart, and seconded by Mr. Bracken —" That the present collector Mr. Daniel O'Connell, be discharged,and that his sureties be notified of the same, and advised that their bonds will be strictly enforced." Ordered —That an advertisement be inserted for a qualified collector. Proposed by Mr. Brown, and seconded by Dr. Croft —" That Messrs. Beetham, Rees, Williamson and Gordon be members of a House j Committee for a period of three months " Carried. Proposed by Mr. Richmond, and seconded

by Dr. Croft—" That Mr. Haughton appointed in the room of Mr. Spensley, jvho is disqualified in consequence of non-attemlance, Mr. Haughton to represent the Arrow." After a vote of thanks to the President the meeting adjourned.