Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1901-02-12
RUNIERD[LON[RAI[D|
Board Of Control Finds CHARGES
Against Anamosa Warden
We're Groundless.
The CHARGES Against Dr.. Druett
Sustained in Part..Iie is
Censured.
Report Of the Investigation and
Findings Of the
Board.
;pecial TO Times-Republican.

report is that there was a long stand
ing quarrel or feud between Druet and
~. w. Sturdevant, the discharged stew
ard, and that these charges largely
grew out of this fact. The charges
against DIR. Druet We're az follows:
L. That he was incompetent and neg
lected patients, and that his incompe-
tency and neglect We're particularly
shown in the cases of Convicts Will
liams. Ralstcn, Shaw and Young.
O. That he lied to the board of control
in regard to hospital supplies.
3. That he interfered with and abused
the complainant while he was in the
discharge of his duties, without suffi-
Gent cause.
a. That he repeatedly entertained con-
victs With obscene stories.
The charges against Warden Hunter
We're in substance:
i. That he retained Dr. Druet as peni-
tertiary physician after having know
ledge of the facts set out in the first,
third and fourth charges against DR..
Druet.
2. That he discharged complainant
without offering an opportunity fo. de-.
Ifense
| OF the charges of ncompetency and
neglect of patients against DR.. Druet
the most SERIOUS one referred to the
convict Williams; he was received into
1.-The penitentiary- hospital on account
+ of diseas ed leg and remained there
about three months. During the last
part of that time he suffered much
pain. The charge of the complainant,
lSturdevant, ia that the leg constantly
grew worse from the time Williams
was received into the hospta until he
Vas discharged, swelling. throbbing and
Egiving great pain for several weeks, and
that the only treatment prescribed by:
DIR. Druet was the application "of witch
hazel and arnica, or something similar
-linament of that kind that Williams
complained bitterly and had Warden
Hunter called in and made complaintto
him and asked that something more be
done for him. The complainant states
THAT in his opinion the treatment was
not proper, and that there We're indica-
\ tons of pus which should have been let
out by an operation. A former inmate
jof the penitentiary who had served as
4 head nurse in the hospital during sew
eral years of his imprisonment, testfies
that DR.. Druet was incompetent and
never gave his patients properattention:
THAT he claimed that Williams leg was
affected with rheumatism and never
made any effort to help him until four
days before he was released; that DR..
Druet then came in with chisel and
mallet and told Williams that he would
operate on his leg. but that Williams
lrefused to allow him to do so
4 Another witness for the complainant
was an inmate of the hospital while
Williams was under treatment, and
testified tha,, judging from the suffer-
ing Williams endured, he was not prop
erly treated. None of these three Wit
nesses had received any medical train
ling, altho they had some knowledge of
4 diseases from observation and expert
ence in the hospital, nor did any of them
! profess to know the actual condition of
Williams leg, nor the treatment he
should have received. They based their
opinion upon the swollen condition of
the limb, upon symptoms which they
4 thought indicated the collection of pus,
the suffering of Williams and the fail
lure of Druet torelieve him of pain
The only expert testimony offered in
| behalf of the complainant was that of
4 DIR. Adair. He had been called to the
4 hospital in the absence OF DR.. Druet and
.Ihad then examined Williams. At that
Il time Williams complained of the pain
The vas suffering and claimed he was
l unable to sleep nights, that he had been
In constant pain for months and that
4 nothing had heen done to relieve him.
The hospital steward told Dr. Adair
4 that nothing had been given Williams
to relieve his pain DR.. Adair at a later
time talked with DR.. Druet in regard to
the case and asked why he didn't drill
4 into the tibia and eyacuate the pus DR.,
Adair further states that Dr. Druet re-
i piled that he had thought about it. but
i as Williams was to be released within
a few days he would not do ANYTHING,
also that he feared it was a case of tn
/ berculosis of the knee Joint. Dr. Adair
/ replied that If he would evacuate the
Ipus it would give Williams great relief.
altho he might not be benefited other
wise. and that IL there was tuberculosis
the limb would have to be amputated
DR.. Adair stated he did not know what
the treatment of Williams had been. but
that II nothing had been done to relieve
his pain DR.. Druet could be justly criti-
cised on that account. He thought that
In other respects the treatment had
been proper He thought williams wa
suffering from an abscess of the head
of the tibuia, but said DIR. Druet,s opin.
ion in regard to 1t may have been cor
rect.
Dr. Druet described the diseased limb
1 the progress of the disease and his
treatment. He stated he decided tina,
the disease was tuberculosis; that ne
.old Williams temporary relief could be
given him by opening the diseased por-
1 ton with chlsel or bone drill but that
Williams refused to allow the operation
to be performed, because only tempo-
rary relief was promised: that he told
Williams 1t was not certain an opera
ton would disclose pus; that amputa-
4 ton of the limb would be necessary
and that the sooner 1t was amputated
the better. He said williams refused to
allow an amputatlon, and desired to
/ be released in order that he might be
| with his friends in case an operation
should be necessary. DR.. Drust stated
4 he gave the case careful attention. and
that the usual remedies were applied
10 relieve williams OF the pain he, va,
Continued on Fifth PaGs., L