HONG KONG DAILY PRESS, THURSDAY, AUGUST
15, 1935.
DR. ARTHUR WAI-TAK WOO'S HONOUR VINDICATED
No Evidence To Justify So Serious A Charge
SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS FALL TO THE GROUND
**I hold defendant has no case to answer, and that the grounds for bringing it were extremely flimsy; there is no evidence justifying so serious a charge as wilful neglect and exposure. Defendant is discharged.
With these words, Mr. W. Schofield at the Centrul Magistracy yesterday, dis- missed the summons brought by John H. S. Waan against Dr. "Arthur Woo for that he, between July 18 and 24 this year, being a person over the age of sixteen years, who had the custody, charge or care of the complainant's child. Natalina Waan, wil fully neglected, and exposed the said child in a manner likely to cause such child un necessary injury to her health.'
The complainant was represented by Mr. E. S. C. Brooks of Messrs. Hastings & Co., while Mr. F. C. Jenkin, K.C.," instructed by Mr. Geo. K. Hall Brutton, of Messrs. Hall Brutton'& Co., was for the defendant.
DR. MONTGOMERY'S EVIDENCE
N
The first witness called when patient there, would you, in simi the case was resumed yesterdaylar circumstances baye moved it Dr. J. H. Montgomery. Medical t> the French Hospital?—Yes. Superintendant at the Matilda
NO INTERFERENCE Hospital, who said that he did a Will you explain lot of radium work in which con- what I know of the case: I think why?-From nection he visited Dr. Woo's Nur-" it was a little difficult for the sing Home frequently.
Chinese nurses to carry out all i instructions given.
the child in this case because I I would move think it would give the best chance of better pursing patient without interference from people not of the nursing staff.
On the morning of July 22, Dr. Woo rang him up about a small child hey had discussed the case previously and he went down to the Home to see the patient. He was not asked by Mr. Waan to do 57. and while there be also attend- ed another case... The discussion with Dr. Li, examining the chart and the visit to the child occupied about 20 minutes...
BACILLARY DYSENTERY
Mr. Brooks: Did you examine the child? I looked at the child and
the
What do you mean by without interference?-Diet was very im- portant and I advised certain things to be given by the mouth and when the nurses went to give it the parents said the child didn't want it and to take it away. was also informed that the par-
enta tifquently. Ufted the child from one bed to another.
Mr. Brooks (addressing the
..
Mr. Jenkin: This is Mr. Brooks' witness and surely I am the one to object to hearsay evidence!
felt it's puise but. In the case of dysentery with a small child there is nothing much to examine ex- cept to see the stool. Witness Bench) This is merely hearsay added that as the child's condition evidence......... was a little better when he saw it, there was no stool to examine.
What was the child suffering from? I thought it was bacillary dysentery. There was no doubt as to the dysentery but as the bac- teriological examination had not been completed, it could not told what type of WES. :
Mr. Brooks (addressing witness) A nursing home which is run by a doctor is run as a commercial venture?-I don't know. It might bebe run for his own convenence; it dysentery it might be run at a loss.
Did you regard the child's condi tlon as serious on that occasion? -Yes. Dr. Mon:gomery ccnt'nued that he next saw the child at, the French Hospital on July 23. at about 8 pm. The condition the was changed in that, there were slight convulsions and the tem perature was reported as 103 while the pulse rate (taken by witness himself) was between 140 to 150. The child way, then in a more ser- lous condition than on the pre- vious occasion.
Would you describe her condi tion then as critical?-Yes. I think But I might almost thing that might be applied on the first oc casion too.
50
UNUSUAL BUT DONE
11
he seemed to be quite satisfied that the child was being well looked after in the French Hos- pital.
i.
to the
Was there the slightest posal- from the nursing home bility. in the removal of the child
French Hospital of causing any injury to her health? In this particular case I should say no. Re-examining Dr. Montgomery, Mr. Brooks, asked why did he say the solleitor for the complainant, in this particular case." replied that there are other cases where it might be inadvisable to move the patient.
Witness
car-
Why was it not inadvisable in
being carefully clothed and this case? Because, a small chi'd.
occupying about 15 minutes, could ried in a closed car, in a journey not have been injured in any way.
MOTHER'S EVIDENCE,
ed a great deal more but the reat was in English and I could not understand it at all
was not be case and asked her "hot to be stupid" He assured her that "the nurses and sisters in that hospital were more experten- I put it to you, that your story ces and the hospital was close to of this $35, which is a suggestion Dr. Bunje."
said in Chinese?-Yes They talk- Did your husband have a "con- | Gerrard, is false.-I actually heard versation with Dr Wool-Yes, this remark made by him, but I could not hear what they Mr. Brooks said that he did not spoke about I only heard the wish to re-examine and that the doctor saying "not necessäry", and case for the complainant had cloe- they eventually removed the child
ed. to the French Hospital.
POINT HELD OVER How did your daughter fare on Addressing the Court Mr. Jenkin the way? She trembled terribly. said:
What else? Her eyes were wideThere was a point held over from the previous hearing and I only want to refer to the Section of the Ordinance which will show. what I am proposing to do I don't say F am going to take this step. I don't want to take it if it can be avoided. If I proceeded on the case as it is put and as it
open.
What happened when you" got to the French Hospital? My daughter's feet got wet through the heavy rain.
"
KINDLY COUNSEL
Before opening his cross-er- animation of the witness Mr. Jen-
Ein sald, "If I could avoid it had been opened and conducted. would not cross-examine this and will be presented when Mr. lady at all. but I must ask Brooks addresses you again, it is her A few questions. Would this, that Dr. Woo turned this you please explain to her. child out to spite the protest of Mr. Interpreter, that I don't want either one or both parents, That to Hurt her feelings in any shapes a fair summary of Mr. Brooks" case and if that is a fair summary
or form?"
This done Mr. Jenkin asked it is this that it will be in fact Mrs. Waan if she was present the credit, of Waan against the when the child was admitted to credit of Dr. Woo, and unless you the Home. She replied in thestr. have formed any opinion amrmative.
Mr. Jenkin: On admission she was attended to by Drs. Woo and Li-Dr. I gave her an infection. That was shortly after admis- sion? Yes.
Two hours later four doctors came in to see your child?-1 de not know what you mean by "see- ing your child."
Did the doctors come in, and as medical men, look at your child? -They looked at the child, but none of them felt her pulse.
came in to see your child?—Yes, In the evening Ave doctors
they came into the room, looked at the child but did not feel her pulse.
MERELY FOOLING?
#
Are you suggesting that these Ave doctors were merely dooling? No, but I did not ask them in They merely came in by chance.
I put it to you that during the Nursing Home you recognise that time that the child was in the
everything was done for your kid- die's good-Yes
The mother of the deceased child, Yeung-ping Waan, was the At the French Hospital you saw next witness called. She was ob- Dr. Montgomery, did you at any viously touched as she told her time suggest to him that your verston of the story and on more child had not had the best treat- than one occasion the evidencement from Dr. Woo and his as- was interrupted through her cry- ing in the witness box.
reputation to a certain extent into the room
nursing home depends on its Yes, I think so."
If a patient died in a nursing home would you say that it would affect the reputation of that nur sing home?-Not necessarily.
If a patient or his relatives de sires "to call in a second opinion, is it etiquette for a doctor to re- fuse?-It's unusual but it's done.
Would you say very unusual?~~ No. I wouldn't be prepared to say that.
sociate doctors?-I never spoke to Dr. Montgomery.-
You speak imperfect English, don't you?-1 understand it but I don't speak it.
I put it to you that you spoke Dr. Montgomery In broken English. but mainly through, the interpretation of Dr. Woo-1 did not speak to Dr. Montgomery at all.
She told the Court that her daughter was admitted into the Home on July 18. and during au the time that it was there she stayed in the Nursing Home ast well On the day in question six doctors, including Dr. Woo, came where the child was but as she did not ask them to come, the other five doctors did not examine the child. She had a conversation the next day with Dr. Woo about this visit and re- marked that it was tunate for the child that so many
Indeed for
doctors should come and see her. Mr. Brooks: Do you remember July 207-Yes.
My husband wanted him to call in Professor Gerrard.
Between 2 and 3 o'clock that Supposing in the case of a par- had a conversation with Dr. Woo? afterncon you, and your husband ticular patient, there is some doubt about the nature of the case and the right treatment, would it be advisable to call in a second opinion?—Yes. also in a very critical condition In the case of Mr. Waan's child.
Is it possible that the child was
you trust European doctors so Im
What did Dr. Woo say?-He said
Dlicitly, do you think there are no
about an hour before you say supposing another opinion bed good doctors among the Chinese?
THE TREATMENT
CAREFUL STUDY
her? I expect the condition was been obtained, is it possible that
You have to pay. $25 for the very much the same.
the child would have lived? charge you $25, you ask for a re- European doctor and when I don't think that an opinion of
duction. What is the normal treatment any description would have made for bacillary dysentery....
Was anybody present when Dr. any difference. At this juncture Mr. Jenkin rose
Woo made that statement? My and said that the question of
In cross-examining Dr. Mont-servant, An Fung heard him. treatment did not enter the case gomery, Mr. Jenkin asked witness about 7 o'clock that evening her Witness went on to say that at at all but after further discussion if he had studied that particular husband asked again if it it was agreed that this evidence case from every point of view and advisable to call in a second opin- might also be taken. Dr. Mont-received a reply to the affirmative ion and she heard the doctor re- gomery then went on to say that Mr. Jenkin: In your opinion and the two essential things
were according to the best medical ply "not advisable." treatment by emetine and treat standards, could anything more woo did not come in but at about On the morning of July 23, Dr. ment by anti-dysenteric serum. be done for this child than was
o'clock: Dr. Li came in and she Rest, diet and reller of pain were in fact done?--No, also essential and he went on to
Is there any incidence in that asked whether there was any hope for the child. On the same even-
Was
I put it to you that on the evening of admission to the French Hospital you told Dr. Woo that whatever happened nobody he had done for the child. I told could have done more than what
him that he had done a lot for the child but that I was surpris ed he could not tell me the na- ture of the case.
I complained about the removal You had no other complaint?—
of the child to the French Hor pital
the hospital?-No.
Was that complaint made at
"GRATITUDE EXPRESSED:
You remember that you and your busband jointly advertised. in the papers your grateful thanks to Dr. Montgomery and the Hos- pital Staff for their devotion to your child? I had nothing to do with the advertisement. It was my husband's business.
......
which makes it unnecessary to go any further on my part, I shall re-call the complainant and at- tack his credit on those lines.
DR. MONTGOMERY'S STORY You have stened to the evid- ence very carefully air,
and you must have, after hearing Dr. Montgomery, little doubt as to the likelihood of anybody being able to sustain à case of this gravity. If It is possible I would, invite you to say that this charge here is groundless and wholly unsubstan-
you to believe, sir, that I am not tiated but I do not want to divert from the ordinary course. I beg
trying to fish or to speak more quickly than in other ordinary cases but Dr. Montgo mery, whose reputation and know- ledge on these matters has not been called into question at all, seems to me must terminate the
would be dimcult to give proper case. If you feel that" "without what I am proposing to do t
credence or reject the complain- ant's evidence, then I must take the course.
make you
WHAT IS NEGLIGENCE Mr. Brooks then said that the charge against the defendant ti
exposure of the child. What is the case is wilful negligence and
wilful neglence and exposure in a matter of law. He then quoted an authority in support of his sub- missions.
#
Continuing, Mr. Brooks sald, "the case for the complainant is that what Dr. Woo did was not what a reasonable man" under the circumstances would have done: We have had it from Dr. Mont- gomery that an hour before the child was moved it was in a criti- cal comilom. Nevertheless Dr. Woo took it upon himself to move thaf child down to
the
French Hospital and the only reason we have heard so far is that the nurses there were more experien- ced and that they could get in "touch with Dr.. Bunje.. I submit that what he did was not a reason- able thing within the definition A quoted to your worship,
THE OTHER QUESTION
The other question in this case is on the point of calling in a second opinion. We had it from Dr. Montgomery that it was not usual when a patient asked for second opinion for a doctor to re- fuse, The evidence in this, case 'is that at 2.30 p.m. on July 20, the complainant wanted to call in Professor Gerrard. His evidence on that point is supported by his wife and the evidence that de- fendant refused to call in Prof. Gerrard is also supported by Mrs. Waan and the, amah.
The second time when we allaged that Dr. Wog refused to call in a second doctor was at 7 pm. on. July 20, Complainant's evidence was supported by Mrs. Waan. Then
Dr. Woo, having suggested that It was in the best interests of the child to remove it to the French Hospital, you whole-heartedly agreed to it?—I did not agree. During the illness, the 'child want ed to go home and I wanted to take my child home and let her die there.
But Dr. Woo persuaded you into
Hospital? Yes,
Complainant said he asked 23. Because it would give the child Dr. Woo to let his child remain better chance? Yes,
and call in another doctor and Dr. Woo said it was “not necessary.
his evidence. is supported, in of a corroborative nature. Lpart, by Mrs. Waan and Mr. and
say that at his suggestion. on a case, in your opinion, which gives ing Mr. and Mrs. Fok 'arrived and taking the child to the French we come to the last time of July
*W**
provious occasion. emetine
any colour to the charges prefer- given. Nothing specially surgical red against Dr. Woo?—No.
ments
at about 630 p.m. Dr. Woo came
in, felt the child's pulse and said,
was required for this and Dr. The complainant has said in the What is you opinion, Mrs. Waan Woo had all the necessary instru- box that as a parent his wishes witness said she told the doctor were entirely disregarded by Dr. that she really did not know and Woo. He came to converse with you in the French hospital? Yes that being a medical man he
And that was after the child should be able to tell better,
HAT had arrived there, and you have had the opportunity of examining her and conferring with Dia Woo and L-Yea
In answer to a question by Mr. Brooks, witness agreed that it was not advisable for a patient to get up for if a patient did get up and walk about it would retard recovery.
Mr Brooks: If a man was lifted
It would not help, would it-t In fact he sought you out, in would not help, but I don't know the nurses duty room, didn't hes
If it would do any special harm, |—Yes.
You know the effects, of course,
NO COMPLAINT
of this case? Yes..
Did he make any complaint to Assuming you had a nursing you about this child being remov- home of your own and you had a en to the French Hospital? No:
“I KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN”” Then what did Dr. Woo say? He replied that in his opinion it would be far better to take the child to the French Hospital.
Mrs. Fok-kam Fong was the next witness called but her witness was
..
Mrs: Fok.
Fung, Jamah to Mr. and Mrs. Waan, then went into the box and I submit that it is fairly estab in answer to a question by Mr. shed that Dr Woo on thres oc- Brooks she said she heard her carions refused to call in a sec master talking to Dr. Woo and ond opinion and that this, in Dr the latter ask why if Mr. Waan Montgomery's opinion: WAB was prepared to pay a European | "ormal."-" doctor $25, he should complain about his ("Dr. Woo's) fees being excessive F
What did you say? I said. I know, what you mean. If you turn my daughter out of your house it means that there is no hope for Mr. Jenkin (ip cro her. Witness went on to say that, tion) that was the doctor assured her that It said in Chinese? Yes, un
NO CASE TDI short dis
held th
Come
to
LAN CRAWFORD, LTD.
FOR YOUR
SLACKS
SHORTS
EXACTLY RIGHT FOR THOSE LONG WINTER HIKES
"
AND
THE COLOURS & MATERIALS !
"WELL YOU MUST
COME TO SEE THEM.
·LADIES' SALON
PIANOS
FOR SALE OR HIRE
TUNING, REGULATING, REPAIRING
The Anderson Music Co., Ltd.
Ice House Street.
Tel. 21822.
TRUCULENT TAILPIECES
by
NO QUARTER
AN AMUSING BOOKLET CONTAINING EXTRACTS
·FROM STRAIGHT - FROM THE SHOULDER REPRINTED FROM HONGKONG DAILY PRESS.
A SURE SPECIFIC
DESPONDENCY & DYSEPSIA
PRICE $1.00
NOW ON SALE
"HONGKONG DAILY PRESS OFFICE
ALL BOOK STOBPS,