A PECULIAR CASE.

Waikato Argus, Volume IV, Issue 253, 1 March 1898, Page 2

A PECULIAR CASE.

(BY TELEGRAPH. —OWN CORRESPONDENT). Auckland, Last Night. A cask of more than usual interest commenced in the Supreme Couit this nrorning, before Justice Connolly and a special jury of four. The easn was that of Ethel Mere Sako Baker v. Arthur Challinor Purchas, claim £SOO for alleged peisonal injuries. Mr Theo. Cooper appeared for the plaintiff, and Messrs T. Cotter and Hugh Campbell, instructed by Messrs Wynyard and Purchas, for the defence. The following special jury was em pannelled : Messrs Graves Aickin (foreman), P. A. Edmktou, P. E. Ma?on and W. Percival In opening the case for the plaintiff, Mr Cooper said it was a somewhat peculiar one ; he questioned whither a similar case had ever come before the Court. The facts were that an unfortunate gir , Eva Holdsworth, was lying in the hospital suffering from extensive burns, and Dr. Purchas thought it was a case where skin-grafting should be performed. TJnfoiinnately, Miss Holdsworth could not be called, as some time after the operation the girl died. Dr. Purchas denied having bad an interview with Duncan McPherson, but evidence would be called to show that McPherson said he could assist in getting 6kiu for the purpose of grafting. McPherson would also state that he said it would not do for any of them to have to remain in the Hospital as they had their ordinary avocations to attend to. The fact that Miss Baker did not acquaint her parents of the fact that she was going to the Hospital, showed she had no anticipation of being compelled to remain there. Miss Baker was the last of tin ee operated upon and she went into that room in the full belief that the operation, though painful, would be a trivial matter ; that her arm could bo bound up and she would be able to go home again. He felt very strongly upon this case. It was enough to make one's blood boil to think how Miss Baker had been treated. When in that operating room twenty inches of skin were removed from her arm and thirty-two inchts from her leg. When Miss Baker recovered consciousness she asked for her clothes to go home, but was told she could not. As a matter of fact Miss Baker had to remain in the hospital for eleven days. Miss Baker had not made any arrangements about her pupils, and had suffered some pecuniary loss. Evidence supporting Mr Cooper's statement was given by Duncan McPherson, Presbyterian City Missionary, and Miss Baker herself. The latter said when her wounds were dressed she first noticed their One wound was on her lett arm and the other on her left leg above the knee. The wounds were on the back of her leg. The wounds on her arm was five inches long and four broad, making 20 in all, and the wound on her leg was eight inches by four. She suffered severe pain and was laid up at the hospital. The whole surface of her skin was removed for 20 inches on her arm and 32 on her leg. She never consented to an operation like that, and she had not recovered yet. The thigh was healing nicely now, but the arm was not healed yet. The statement of defence filed by Dr. Purchase, sets out consent on the part of plaintiff, and that she volunteted to part with some skin. He denies that he promised to remove only a small portion of skin or stated that the operation would not involve the plaintiff remaining in the hospital. The case is still proceedings, and is likely to last three days.