AN UNFORTUNATE MISTAKE

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 3776, 1 October 1907, Page 4

AN UNFORTUNATE MISTAKE

On Saturday last Dame Rumor was busy circulating a report o' a sensational character that a mistake had occurred in the burial of a patient who had died at the Palmerston North Hospital, says the Times. “The Dame’’ was in this instance, as is generally the case, a lying jade. As a result of careful inquiries from the fountain source we learn that the following is what actually occurred.

On Thursday last two male patients breathed their last at the Palmerston Hospital. In both cases, from the time of their admission into the institution, little or no hope was held out for their recovery. According to custom the remains of both shortly after their death were convej'ed to the mortuary in the hospital grounds to await burial. One of the deceased was to be buried from the hospital on Saturday, the other a resident of Palmerston, from his late private residence on Sunday. On Thursday the undertaker conveyed the remains of one to his late home in the town, the other remaining in the mortuary awaiting burial from there on Saturday. On Friday a sister of the stranger arrived from Lyttelton to see the last of her brother. She was accompanied by one of the hospital staff to the mortuary of that institution to see the remains. It was then that the discovery was made that the wrong body had been removed. Immediately the nurse looked upon the features of the dead she remarked to the relative; —“Oh, that is not your brother, that is Mr .” How the mistake occurred is * simply told. Two reasons are given, firstly the striking resemblance between the appearance of the features of the two men after death and secondly wrong information alleged to have been given to the undertaker by a casual hand employed at the Hospital, who in reply to a question from the undertaker as to which was the body of Mr , answered, “the one on the table.’’ The undertaker was himself personally well acquainted with the deceased resident and when placing the body in the coffin had no doubt that they were his remains. In both instances, we understand the features had undergone a similar process of change by the ravages of their respective ailments. The undertaker duly carried the body to the private residence, where it was received and no doubts were raised as to anything being wrong.

When the mistake was discovered at the Hospital, the undertaker was communicated with and immediately proceeded to the house. Three brothers of the deceased were seen and informed of the unfortunate mistake. They all viewed the body again to satisfy themselves, and the relations realised with some difficulty that the bod} 7 was not that of their late brother. They were subsequently, however, convinced that a mistake had been made which was duly rectified the same evening.