83

H.—l

1641. I'lio object of a consultation is to obtain different opinions, is it not?— Quite so. 1642. And a man may look at a tiling from a different point of view from his colleagues?— Yes. 1643. Occasionally, 1 suppose, you have made wrong diagnosis?— Yes. There are very few men who have not. 1644._ You had cases on each side of Mrs. A ? —Yes. 1645. Were you present at the operation?—l had forgotten all about her. Ido not think I was present. 1646. Look at that book again ; perhaps it will remind you? —I do not think I was present. I would not have been present at an operation of that kind. There is not much in it. 1647. You have jusc told us that you had cases on each side of her; you certainly had these other cases—six in all ?—Are you sure that they are my cases. 1648. They are marked hero as Dr. Batchelor's cases ?—Well, ulcer of the leg would certainly not be one of my cases. 1649. I am told that those were Dr. Batchelor's cases alongside of her ?—Are you sure of that. Ido not admit it. 'Here the witness described the position of the beds on the plan.] '1650. I will give you some of the names : Mrs. V , from the 28th May to the 19th June?— I have it from the 17th January to the 17th February. 1651. But she came in again, was operated on on the 28th May, and discharged on the 19th June ?—I think you have the wrong date. It was from the 17th January to the 17th February. 1652. It is the fact that she came in again, and was operated on on the 28th May, but we do not know the date of her admission ?—lt is very improbable that she was in the same bed on two occasions. I cannot find anything about her the second time in this book. 1653. We shall try and give the proper dates presently. What I want to get from the witness is the fact that these two cases were one on each side of Mrs. S . Do you remember what bed the woman was put in ? —The case is mentioned here, but it does not say what bed she was put in. 1654. The Chairman.'] What was the matter with her ? —Cancer. 1655. Mr. Chapman.] Do you remember Miss M ?—Yes. 1656. The Chairman.'] What was her case ?—A small fibroid polypus of the uterus. 1657. Mr. Chapman.] In the same part of the womb as in Mrs. S 's case, was it not ? —Yes, in the mouth of the womb. 1658. She was nineteen days in the hospital: admitted the 20th June; discharged the 9th July ?—Yes. 1659. Mrs. S , admitted the 10th June, was a case of placenta retained, was it not? — Yes. I remember that woman, and saw her in her bed. 1660. She was over on the side where Mrs. S ■ afterwards was ?—I think so. 1661. Alongside of Kate W ?—Very likely. I was under the impression that she was on the other side, but Dr. Copland says not. 1662. Do you remember the case of Mrs. B , an Emmet's operation ?—What was the date of that ? 1663. From the 12th June to the 9th July ?—I remember that. 1664. Do you remember w 7here she was ?—I do not. 1665. Was she not in the bed opposite Mrs. A , and at another time opposite Kate W ? —I do not know. 1666. Was she not moved from one side to another ?—I am not going to say anything about that, because I do not know anything about it. 1667. She was in for twenty-seven days and made a good recovery, did she not ?—Yes. 1668. The next case is Mrs. A , the 30th May?— This was a case of ovariotomy. She w ras brought back and put alongside of Kate W , and I kicked up a row about it. 1669. To whom did you speak about that case?—To Dr. Copland and the nurse. lam perfectly prepared to swear that I spoke to the nurse first, and afterwards to the house surgeon, about this woman having a septic temperature. 1670. She was at one time in the same bed which was subsequently occupied by Mrs. S , and was afterwards changed ? 1671. She was in twenty-nine days, and made a good recovery?— Very likely. 1672. She was there, was she not, at the time that Kate W 's temperature was high?— She was alongside of Kate W at the time she went into the ward, after removal from the special ward, following the operation. 1673. As to Mar>' J , admitted the Bth May, discharged the 28th May. Do you remember her case? —It was a case of displacement of the uterus, but I do not know anything about her position in the ward. 1674. I see that you have got Mrs. V entered?—lt is not put in its order. She evidently was operated on the first time she was in, but I do not know what was done to her the second time. 1675. Then, you have not entered her a second time?— Perhaps nothing was done the second time ; very likely not. 1676. These were cases many of which you say were liable to septic poisoning?— Yes. 1677. You had no trouble with them up to the time of Mrs. S 's case ?—I had not. 1678. Do you know if any other medical men had surgical cases in that ward at the same time? —There was one that 1 saw, but there was nothing very remarkable about it. 1679. What case was that?—A case of the removal of the breast. 1680. There were two cases of breast? —Yes, But I only saw one of them after operation.