The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1896-11-12
DISAGREEMENT OF DoCroRs.
The Difference Between Mcmbrnnous
CrOup mud DinhtherIa

A few days ago the Board Of Health
ordered that warrants be issued against
DIR. Herbert NJ. Nash and Mr.. l.. Clay
kllby for failure to report the case of
membranous Group in the latters fam
lily Mr.. Kilbys little 3-year-old
daughter died with the disease few
days ago. The health board decided
recently that membranous Group and
diphtheria should be regarded as SINH
lar so far as precautions against their
spread was concerned. When the sub
Ject was discussed In the board the fact
that MIR. kilby, when q member Of
previous board, had desired certain par
ties prosecuted for not properly report
ing contagious disease, was empha-
sized.
Mr.. Kilby came up before Justice Ash
burn yesterday morning for trial. the
city being represented by it's legal ad-
wiser. Mr.. Walter H. Taylor. City At
torney. The accused were not repre-
scented by counsel. but they proved
able to take care of themselves without
legal assistance. The Board of Health
Except the secretary We're present, ana
it was warm session of this court
DIR. Southgatc Leigh. who was one of
the two physicians in attendance upon
the child, was present as n witness
DR.. Newbill president of the Board
of Health. cited authorities to show that
the two diseases should be considered
alike, but Dr. Nash made the point
that the authorities We're not agreed
on the subject, and this was admitted
by DR. Newbill. DR.. Nash and Dr.
Leigh did not consider mcubranous
Group contagious. nor did DIR. Chilea of
the Board of Health. il was claimed.
by the defense that DIR. Riddick. Of the
board, had said in treating a child OF
the Rev. DIR. Young of Epworth Church,
for membranous Group, that the disease
was not infectious. DR. Riddick
promptly denied this, and the proceed
inEs Just here were punctuatcd with
some warm remarks on both sides, cs-
pecially between Drs. Rddick and
Nash DR.. Riddick explained that the
Rev. DR.. Young's child was sick with
tonsilitis. which disease he had said
was not contagious.
DIR. Nash. on the ground that the au-
thorties disagree on the subject in
question. thought that the Board of
Health of Norfolk holds itself in con-
tempt when il decides to infict pun
ishment upon persons who do not take
its view of the matter.
DR.. Field, of the Board of Health.
gave rs reason in Justification of
the boards action. that the Board of
Health of New York had come 10 the
same decision as to the similarity of
the two diseases, based upon the fact
that i'll az per cent. of the cases of
membranoms Group in that city the
L,
Kilby explained. for himself. that his
action in the matter had been under
the direction of DR.. Nash. who didn't
consider the case contagious, and that
his Niilby's) older child had been al
lowed TO so into the room with her
sick sister In regard to his action in
another case-when he was a member
of the Board of Health--he said that
was n severe case of diphthcria and in
this he was supported by n statement
from DR.. Leigh.
The warrants against DR.. Nash and
Mr.. Kilby finally fell through and were
dismissed when the Board of Health ad-
mitted that they could not prove that
MIR. Kilby's childs disease was conta-
sious. During the trial City Attorney,
Tarlcr expressed the opinion that to
make the Board of Health's order con-
corning membranons Group effective
chat is to carry with Il fine for vio-
lation) beyond question. 1t should be
enacted into city ordinance.