The independent. [volume] (Elizabeth City, N.C.) 1908-1936, 1929-06-21


administered by mistake.
DR.. R. L. Payne, who performed
the operation, stated on the witness
stand at the coronerS inquest in
Norfolk, Thursday afternoon, that
he thought he had given Mrs. Gar
rett an injection of a l2o solution
of nitrate of silver.
After her death, he examined her
left kidney which he naC removed,
and could distinctly smell the strong
cdor of formaldehyde gas indicating
that the solution that had been used
was a deadly solution of formalin
and not silver nitrate.
This odor which DR.. Payne could
so distinctly smell after Mrs. Gar
rett's death, had been in the wo-
mans kidney for fourteen days. DR..
Payne had not smelled that solu-
ton when he injected it into her
kidney fourteen days previously.
Asked by the coroner, DR.. c. d. J.
Mcdonald, why he had not reported
the fact to the coroner's office, DIR.
Payne explained that he was SO dis
tressed over the death and the COM
plications that had arisen that it
never occurred TO him that he should
notify the coroner. He said that as
soon as he had verified the facts, he
communicated them to the dead
woman's husband, laying all the
facts before him.
Miss Eggleston, the attendant
nurse in the case testified that
pathological examination Of the con-
tents of the bottle from which Mrs.
Garrett was given the fatal injec-
ton, showed that it contained a
solution of approximately one-third
silver nitrate and two-thirds forma-
| lin.
No one processes to know how the
pharmacist in st. Vincents hospital
got formalin in the silver nitrate
bottle.
Coroner Mcdonald was withhold
! ing his verdict when this newspaper
went to press.
| Mrs. Garrett died in the Norfolk
hospital on Sunday, May 18th, fol-
lowing a hasty and mysterious sur
gical operation. That there was
anything unusual about the opera
ton or in her death was not made
public.
A week or more after her death
this newspaper learned upon good
authority that Mrs. Carrots. death
was due to a hospital biuiidef. This
newspaper made no mention of the
matter as it's informant had given
the information in strict confidence.
But within q few days this news
paper learned from another source
that friends of Mrs. Garrett were
openly charging that she was the
victim of medical murder. There
upon the editor of this newspaper
approached Cecil F. Garrett, huS-
band of the deceased and asked him
for verification of the reports. Mr..
Garrett appeared dumb-struck and
told the editor of this newspaper
that it was his first knowledge Of
the matter, but said that he had
felt an uneasincss about it all the
time. Mr.. Garrett said he would
demand the truth Of the Norfolk
physician.
Several days later Mr.. Garrett
! told the editor Of this newspaper
that he had investigated and had
had the full cooperation of DR..
Payne; that the death of his wife
had been due to the administration
of a fatal injection by mistake.
Thereupon The Independent in its
issue of June 7th published the in
formation which it had been with
holding for several weeks; published
it because there are too many cases
of this kind in which doctors bury
their mistakes and leave the public
in ignorance of their blunders.
At no time did Mr.. Garrett make
an outcry against the hospital or
any member of its staff and at all
times he has insisted that DR.. Payne
was blameless. 1t is an unvcriiled
but persistent rumor that Mr.. Gar
rett was offered handsome settle
ment to shield the physician and
hospital from unpleasant publicity.