102

[SEEGT. J. GRIFFITHS.

H.—6c.

422. You do not know whether Trooper Brown was there or not?—l could not say. 423. Did you see those serious cases that were sent ashore? —No, sir. 424. Did they leave the hospital on board without your seeing them ?—They left the hospital the morning after. 425. Without your seeing them ?—Yes, sir. 426. Who was in charge of the hospital whilst you were away? When did you leave /— 1 iett the hospital the night before. 427. Who was in charge of the hospital when you left?— The surgeon-major left Captain Eccles in charge, sir. 428. You cannot give me any information about this Trooper Brown I —JNo, sir. 429. Whose duty was it to see that a man was taken into the hospital who was marked for the hospital ?—That was left to the surgeon-major or the Health Officer who marked him. 430. Supposing a man had been marked for admission to the hospital, whose duty was it to see that the man went into the hospital? —Mine, sir. 431. Do you know of cases where men were marked and not taken into the hospital at once > —Never, sir. They were taken into the hospital as soon as they were marked. They might have been allowed to get their kits. . , 432. If there is evidence given that two men were marked for the hospital both sultenng trom the measles and the rash plainly visible and that one remained the whole night with his corps, would that have been through neglect on your part ?—No, sir, that would not. 433. We have evidence that two men were marked for the hospital and one was taken in, and the other, it was stated, was left all night :do you remember those cases?—No, sir ; every man who reported himself to me was taken in. . 434. Have you any knowledge at what date the hospital accommodation was fully occupied > —The hospital was never full until the night before we got to Wellington. 435. Does that mean the increased accommodation also ?—Yes. 436. But prior to increasing the accommodation, have you any recollection of the hospital ever being full so that you would have to refuse to take a patient in?—No, sir. 437. Then, from Durban to Melbourne any one who was marked for hospital could have been taken in ?—Yes, sir. 438. After leaving Melbourne the measles broke out and developed rapidly ?—Yes, sir. 439 You then put up increased accommodation ?—Yes, sir. 440. You say up to the day before you arrived in Wellington you would not have refused any patient who was marked for hospital ?—Yes, sir. , 441 Well, now, if this other sworn evidence has been given that this man after being marked for hospital was allowed to remain among the men all night to sleep, you say there was room m the hospital to have taken him in?— Yes, sir. 442. There would be no neglect on your part?— Most decidedly not, if the man did not report 443 How were you made acquainted of the fact that a man was marked for the hospital ?— ■Simply by his appearance at the hospital. Of course, if the man did not report himself to me I could not take him in. , 444 If a doctor marked a man having an infectious disease that man could hang about as lone 'as he liked unless he went to the hospital of his own free will ?— Most decidedly not. _ 445. Whose duty was it to see that he went into the hospital ?—That was the man s own duty to come down to the hospital. . . 446 If that man did not like to go into the hospital, although being marked as having an infectious disease, who would put him in the hospital ?—lt all depends on what time he was reported If he was reported at the sick-parade he would be taken to the.hospital at once; but at any other time should that man happen to go up and simply report himself privately to the doctor, the doctor would give him a slip to take him into the hospital. I could not take him in UII e5 447 If a man were marked for the hospital on the morning of the day and did not appear at the hospital until the next day would you think it was dangerous ?—Most decidedly not. A man would have been an ass if he did not report that he was marked for hospital. 448 If we have sworn evidence that two men were marked for the hospital both suffering from measles and that m one case the measles were so clearly developed that anybody could see it and that man slept with his messmates that night, do you think somebody neglected his duty I —No, sir, Ido not; I cannot see it at all. , ; ■ 449 Then you do not think it was any one's to see that a man went into the hospital until that man himself came to the hospital ?—Of course, that is rather a mixed question. _ 450 We have had evidence that two men were marked to go to the hospital; one went in, and the other was permitted to remain all night, and in further cross-questioning it was stated that the reason he was not admitted to the hospital was because there was no room. You say there was room until the day before you arrived in Wellington ? -Yes, sir. 451. If such took place it was not because there was no accommodation in the hospital i , —WO. 452! You say the quality of the food was good, sergeant ?—Yes, sir. 453 You had no complaint at all?—No, sir, not in reference to the food. 454 And the only complaint you had about the want of attendance was simply that they were not attended to promptly enough in some instances ?—Yes, sir, that was the only cause ot mP 4S5 n The Chairman.] What was the custom, sergeant, in the case of a man who was taken ill in the afternoon : did he go up to the doctor ?—He could go up at any time to the doctor. He could go up at all times. The doctor raised no point about that.