.MjEwNg.MzAzMjc

[page 960] By Mr. Baker: Ques: Your testimony was given Tuesday night was it not, originally? Ans. Yes, sir. Ques. I want to read you this: [pasted in clip from newspaper "'Scrupulous Care.' The superintendent assures the trustees and the people of Maine that it is the purpose and practice of the hospital authorities to "guard with scrupulous care" everything pertaining to the institution. This scrupulous care extends to the treatment of patients, and is so dovetailed with the "law of kindness" that it is impossible that any one should be hurt by one of those emeutes between patients which the trustees, with "scrupulous care," set under the head of "accidents." But one day the attendants left for a long time some twenty maniacs together in one of the wards, and during this absence a row occurred, in which one lady was pounded about the face until it was swollen and bruised and her eyes so blackened that she was not recognizable even to her husband who called a week later. She ran at once to her room, and, frightened beyond measure, covered herself with the bed-clothes, where she remained in silence until the next day before any attendant, nurse, physician, superintendent or other officer even ventured an inquiry as to her condition, although other patients told the attendant upon his return. When the shocked and grieved husband asked why his wife was not promptly attended to, the "law of kindness" prompted the reply with "scrupulous care," that it didn't make any difference, for "she was going to die any way.'" Now as that relates to a case in reference to which you have testified I wish to know whether you do not consider that as a gross perversion of the facts of the case as stated even by yourself? Ans. I should say that that was by no means a literally correct statement of the case; because it confuses 2 or 3 times together, and I think in some cases it makes it worse than it was. Ques. Doesn't it do the superintendent of that institution the most serious injustice, even