THE OTAKI HOSPITAL.

Otaki Mail, Volume XXVIII, 15 September 1920, Page 3

THE OTAKI HOSPITAL.

In Saturday's issue of the “Manawatu Herald” the following appeared as a leading article: —

‘‘Some years ago Dr. Mason induced the Government to take over his private hospital at Otaki, and its administration and upkeep was placed under the jurisdiction of the AVellington Hospital Board. The cost oi maintaining such an institution increased the burden of the AVcllington hospital district levies, in which the whole of the Horowheuua County, including Levin Borough, shared. At the same time patients from the northern portion of the Ilorowhenua County were being sent for treatment to Palmerston, la 1912 an agitation was set afoot to have the northern

portion of the Horowheuua County and borough of Levin merged into the Palmerston Hospital District. This was agreed to. but a later agitation asked that the whole of the Horowlicnua County be excluded from Wellington and included in the merger. Such merger would save the

1 ratepayers in Horowhcmm some huuf dreds of pounds per annum. Tho 1 Palmerston Board consented to agree ito Horowheuua coming in. on condition that it contributed £25(19 towards additions to the hospital to provide II| for increased accommodation. It was j distinctly pointed out at the time that j the Palmerston Board did not wish to Ibe saddled with the Otaki Cottage Hospital, as its policy was centralisation and district nurses. Those who advocated the merger had no authority from the Palmerston Board to say that the Cottage Hospital would bo maintained. In the meantime, the Department decided to take over the Cottage Hospital and administer it in If conjunction with the State Consuntp--1 tive Sanatorium, and the Palmerston I Board was to be charged with tho j maintenance and collection of j patients ’ fees. The Department got | tired of nursing the baby, and asked i the Board to take over the Cottage | Hospital. A motion was put through . at a Board meeting, agreeing to take ! over the Cottage Hospital. A motion ! to rescind was defeated by a narrow | majority, and the Board instructed its medical advisory committee to ascertain whether the patients treated at , the Cottage Hospital could have been ! treated equally well in ihe main hospital. The committee reported at the . last meeting that it was of opinion • that, with the exception of occasional emergency cases, Ihe best interests of : the patients could have been served | by bringing them to Palmerston North for treatment. The Board postponed i discussion until a more detailed report 1 was furnished. If this Cottage Hos- ! pita! is to be maintained for the special benefit of southern patients, 1 thou the extra administrative charges should be borne 'by Ilorowhenua, or ; the institution closed down.”