The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-01-16

son Of tho failure OF the superintendent
90 have proper cOnsultatior with his as
sistant physicians. your respondent denies
the same. calls for tho proof. and refers
70 what he has heretofore set out IN that
respect.
"(d) A. to the charge that the elm
ical records are kept by the assistant
physicians at their own homes and that
he does not see them as often as he
should your respondent alleges that the
assistant physicians. having Immediate
charge Of the patients. w1losa clinical
records are kept IN bound vnlunne. have
more occasion 20 refer thereto than does
your respondent. and that there being no
provision I'm the bylaws n the insfitil-
ton az 20 where suoh clinical records shall
he kept. Il has been deemed ernedisn1
% permit them % be kept by tho persons
having moro frequent need Of their lise
Your respondent denies that he did NOT
Fee them as often as he ahotfid ana al
leges that he made such eEaroinet,on.
or them as the welfare OF tha r,atte,4,
seemed 20 reouire
'e) As 70 the charge that he fauea
70 supply offices for his assistant physl-
claus IN the executive building. yu,lr re-
hpondent alleges that the rearcyn ~ bsu
nature 80 70 do has been The vhvgso.,y
/ imposFihility Of assigning Offices yrbsr,
no Offices existed
Your respondent alleges what te =
''lpaDie tact. that the executive huild
- 70 IT,
physical limits by its adrrfnt-+y,.,.
noes. and that there Is no room u,htcb
might be assigned az the Offices for ~.
49, MUSICIANS. Your respondent
"liTses mat having no orIices- in Tho
executive building 20 as~fqn ~ ~, ...,..
ant physicians. he did. boyvev~- 49,, -.
rooms, to-w one IN the buildfnr tnov,-o
- cameron Hall and one IN the rre,-,,
| ary building, 20 whic he assigned go
r -.s assistant physicians for odloe pur-
20 Az 70 the charge that 10 ,,nod -
FURNISH a list u the dietary - ~ "
uents. other than those who 49, -
paced on special diet. therenv rot 80
forming 70 Rule IT. your Responded, a.
nles IN toto said charge. calls for ~.
trt,oo . ~ the records o' the ingti-
sL"pn IN reputation. and refers N v,ba4
Ne mas heretofore Said IN that regard
Did Not Leave Work
to Assistant Physicians
go As 70 the charge that the tTest-
o.. tne patients Is left In the main
/ - me assistant physicians and 49, y.
u"es not know whether they etten4 ~
their duties your respondent dente, 49,
same and calls for the proof
'hl As 70 the charge that he dis
played lack Of knowledge Of me An
ternal working of the institution vo,Ir
respondent denies the charRa and oolI.
for the proof Your responder, araaas
mat ne IS acquainted with all n, fbo
ueu1is % every department ~ this IN
s~1uuoh. and refers to a report Of the
! special board Of directors 10 The CO..
ernor Of Virginia under date Ssofe,-
Der, 1903, when said board was oo-nDoso5
~ Judge @. T. Garrett. r. II Clov,es 80
a. D. Cole. IN the following vvorAa.
Ihe directors take pleasure in report-
Ing this hospital as IN excellen+ condi-
ton. and they feel they cannot com
mend too highly the ability and fsitB-
/ fulness with which the sirrerioten5er.
discharges the nultifarious. delicate ana
responsible duties OF his Office showing
AZ all times an absolute familiarity win
the minutest detail or every tleua rtn,ent
of the work ~ the Institution and AL
ways exercising the uveliest interest In
anu "armest sympathy for the un-
fortunate patients entrusted 20 his care
Since that report was made Your re-
spondent alleges that this institution has
been visited once a month by the special
board or directors, twice by A committee
ot the Legislature. and three times bv
the General Hospital Board itself whose
duty n was on those occasions 10 in
Guire into and acauaint themselves with
its physical condition and the conduct
and management OF its affairs by this
respondent. and yet from no source
worthy OF serious consideration has come
a complaint against this respondent and
Z his management thereof until the report
was made by the subcommittee OF your
board. which formed the basis OF those
charges
T. AS 20 the charge that he failed %
see that the attendants had discharged
their duties and that he either did not
know OF or that he acquiesced in the
burning of patients hv caustic. that he
did not know Of The ducxlng Of patients
Ia the institution. and that he did not
~ N. hoe D. frrr 81
patient in the same water your re-
spondent denies any dereliction b duty
in each Of the particulars above set out
and refers 70 what he has heretofore
S. id in that regard
"OD As 10 the charge that he has in
dulged in criticisms Of the actions Of the
special board there by occasioning fric-
tion between himself and this board your
respondent SAYS that 1t is truo he INDUCED
IN criticism OF one OF the members OF
said board. and made allegation that
such member was an unfit person to be
a member OF said board; that he gavs
the reasons therefor in writing to the
Senate OF Virginia. and that that body.
by unanimous vote. sustained the crfti-
cisms which he made Your respondent
denies that he has made any improper
criticisms OF the special board.
'CS) AS 70 the charge that ne has failed
to examine the mail addressed to the
patients OF the institution. and that in
his absence. he authorized his son to
open the official mail instead OF leaving
IL for the first assistant physician IN
charge, thereby creating friction. your
respondent denies that he has ever failed
to examine the mali addressed to the
patients OF this institution. or that any
friction has been ocCasioned by his hav-
ing authorized his son. Ia his absence,
to open his personal mail.
While he il empowered by the by
laws TO authorize some person 10 open
the mail during his absence. Il IS not
required Of him to designate any partic-
ular person. and your respondent alleges
that he had a right % designate his son
10 open both the official and personal
mail. II he desired So 90 do. but that In
no case did he authorize his son to omen
anN but his nersnna- nail laa.-Lna, ~.