11

H.—lB.

would serve no good purpose, to go at length into the question how these charges were got up, and what particular share this or that person took in the matter. It is sufficient to say that, notwithstanding the deficiency of evidence, there is enough to show, independently of the " Tongariro " letter, that Dr. Stewart and Dr. De Eenzi were both concerned in the business. This is shown by such incidents as stopping a man in the street to ask him if he had ever seen the House Surgeon intoxicated, and ringing up another doctor to ask whether it was true that a patient of his just out of the Hospital had been discharged with a broken leg. It is for these gentlemen to consider how far they can reconcile their methods with any high code of ethics, either general or professional; and Dr. Stewart in particular might profitably reflect on the verdict which in the light of such a code must be pronounced upon his "Tongariro" letter, with its general spirit of disingenuousness and malignity, its reckless suggestion of what is false, and its aggravation or perversion of what is true by unfair phrases and turns of expression. Dr. Stewart, at the time of his writing this letter, was on the consulting staff of the Hospital, and had quite recently been on the active surgical staff. Yet, instead of availing himself of his position to get abuses rectified, he preferred to stir up the mud by an anonymous letter, making many imputations which were supported by no facts within his knowledge, and manifestly prompted by no unalloyed desire to promote the good working of the Hospital in the public interests. If the proportion in the letter of " Tongariro" between what is asserted, or implied under the equally effective form of questions, and what is proved by evidence in the sense so implied, be considered, it will remain matter for regret that one who could make such pertinent practical suggestions as Dr. Stewart has shown in his evidence that he was able to make should not have adopted a more reasonable mode of calling attention to abuses. With these remarks, this part of the subject may be left, and I now proceed to say a few words upon the outside agitation which, apparently started by the suspension of Nurse Cameron and the letter of "Tongariro," culminated in a public meeting, held on the 4th April last. Since it is evident that public agitation of this sort, whilst it arises from the real or supposed methods of Hospital management, must in its turn react upon that management, it appears relevant to notice it here with the view of ascertaining as far as possible whether public feeling and sympathy had been misled and caused to flow in wrong channels. The persons assembled at the meeting in question apprehended that the Board intended to make a clearance of many of its old servants, in pursuance of Dr. MacGregor's recommendation, and they judged of the motives of both the department and the Board by what they deemed to be an act of flagrant injustice already committed by the dismissal of Nurse Cameron, without giving her, as they supposed, an opportunity of defending herself. It would be difficult to-day to get up a meeting to protest on behalf of Nurse Cameron, and if the facts had been then known, it is easy to conceive that the speeches would have lost much of their point, and the public feeling much of its intensity. But the point of most interest and importance at the present moment is the feeling which was shown at the meeting in relation to the new system of nursing. I pass over the remark of one speaker, that "If the Hospital were to be turned into a nursing school, God help the poor people who had to go there," because the speaker must doubtless have afterwards reflected that, however true this might be of a school consisting of pupils only and no teachers, yet such a school had not been instituted or suggested. But I notice that Dr. MacGregor's remark, that " educated and refined young women " should be induced to take up nursing as a career, was received at one moment with hooting and at another with laughter. This is significant, not on account of the hooting and the laughter, which can be got by proper management from any crowd, but by reason of the apparent misapprehension which existed in the mind of the speaker who drew these manifestations of feeling from the ignorant and unthinking. For no one can suppose that this speaker, or any of the gentlemen who addressed the meeting, or any of the associations whose opinions we may suppose to have been reflected thereat, can entertain any dislike to " education and refinement," as such. Eepresentatives of progress, as all these persons and associations are, and agencies of " light and leading" in the work of rectifying human society, it is obvious that they can desire nothing so ardently as the general diffusion amongst all ranks of the " education and refinement " which have so long been unjustly restricted to the few. If, therefore, they have appeared for a moment antagonistic to the very thing the augmentation of which constitutes to so large an extent their own raison d'etre, it must be because they thought they were being offered shoddy instead of genuine stuff, and believed that their invective and their sarcasm were levelled at a wolf in sheep's clothing. They must have imagined—from whatever quarter they may have got the notion—that the phrase " education and refinement " was but a euphemism for "fine-ladyisin," and they plainly declared that they wanted none of it. These gentlemen and associations will therefore be gratified by the assurance that they are mistaken—that the modern system of nursing is not a dilettante business, or by any means suited to the young lady whose listless life craves for a new sensation. Such as she are soon weeded out by the sternness and exactness of modern training, and none are likely to be left except those who intend real and earnest work. When this is once understood we may expect that these leaders of public opinion in Christchurch will not only consent, but vehemently insist that the latest and best methods shall be introduced into their Hospital, however strongly they may desire to show the fullest consideration to old servants whose interests are imperilled by the remorseless progress of civilisation. It will doubtless come to be recognised by them that the department of hospital nursing supplies one mode by which the intelligence awakened and the mental alacrity cultivated by the school system so much valued by the public may be exercised in duties alike honourable to the workers and beneficial to the sick and suffering. I believe I have now gone through all the specific allegations which have been formally made against the Hospital administration. But other statements have been made in evidence in which either the general administration or the conduct of the House Surgeon or matron has been called in question. An instance or two will suffice. On one occasion a man died of sudden hemorrhage