The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1891-09-04
Tho Law Concerning Ships Doctors.


A telegram from Boston announces an
interesting decision by the Supreme Judicial
Court OF Massachusetts relating to the
liability OF a steamship company for negli-
gence on the part Of ships surgeon In the
medical treatment Of passengers.
MARY OBR1EN, who was a steerage pas
senger on the Catalonia In July, 1889, sued
the Cunard Steamship Company to recover
damages alleged to have been sustained by
reason OF the misconduct and negligence OF
the surgeon OF the steamer, who, as she
said, had vaccinated her against her will,
and had performed the operation improperly.
As to the first charge. which II true would
constitute an assault In the eye Of the law,
the court declares that there was no evi.
dence to support 1t. As to the question Of
negligence, the court holds that, even II the
doctor was negligent. his lack OF care and
skill is not attributable to the steamship
company by which he was employed, 80 long
as the company had exercised due diligence
in selecting the surgeon. Here is the Ian
guage Of the decision on this point:
-The master owners OF the ship cannot interfere
in the treatment OF the medical officer when attends
passenger he 10 not their servant engaged In their
business and subject TO their control his
treatment. They do their whole duty II they employ
duly qualified and competent surgeon. and supply him
with all necessary and proper instruments. medicine
and medical comforts and have him in readiness for
such passengers a. choose to employ him"
The question thus decided Is said to be
a new one in Massachusetts, but it is not
new in this State. In 1885 case was tried
in the Superior Court Of this city In which
BERTHA LAUBHEIM sued the corporation
which runs line OF steamships between
Rotterdam and New York to recover dam
ages which she claimed to have suffered by
reason Of the unskilful treatment to which
she was subjected by the surgeon OF one OF
tho company's ships. She was stccrago
passenger. and when at sea she fell on
the deck and fractured knce cap
For this injury she was treated by the
ships surgeon; but after landing the result
proved to be SO unsatisfactory that 1t be-
came necessary to amputate the injured leg
The law. however. was held to be against
the plaintiff by all the courts-at the Trial
Term. in the General Term, and In the Court
OF Appeals. The opinion OF the Court OF Ap-
peals was written by Judge FINCH. who said
that whether ths defendant was bound by
law to provide u surgeon for Its ships, or
whether 1t provided surgeon from choice,
Its duty to tho passengers was to Be-
lect reasonably competent man for
the place. aud 1t was liable only for
neglect OF that duty. Amplifylng this
proposition. the Judge added: at is re-
sponslblc solely for its own negligence
and not for that OF the surgeon employed.
In performing such duty it Is bound only to
exercise reasonable care and diligence, and
is not compelled to select and employ the
highest skill and longest experience" The
proof failed to show that the Rotterdam
company had been careless or negligent In
selecting tho surgeon who treated the plain
tin, but. on tho contrary. 1t tended to estab-
lish his competency. For these reasons tho
judgment Diminishing the complaint was Of.
Armed.
moro recent case involving q similar
question came before the General Term of
the Supreme Court In Brooklyn last year In
suit against the State Steamship Company
by a young woman named ALICE NJ. ALLAN.
The plaintiff was passenger on one OF the
defendants steamers from Glasgow to New
York. Feeling cold coming on. she asked
the stewardess for somo quinine from tho
medicine supply on board. A part of tho
contract OF passage was that passengers
should be furnished with medicines without
additional expense. Tho medicines were In
the charge OF tho ships doctor, and 1t was