Mexborough and Swinton Times January 29, 1926
Fullerton Hospital
A Lively Annual Meeting
Proposed New Medical Area
Battle over Doctors
Exceptional interest was taken this year’s annual meeting of the subscribers to the Fullerton Hospital, Denaby Main, held on Monday in the Large Hall Denaby.
Mr L Winpenny, chairman of the Horse Committee, had a lively audience of over 600 members to deal with and he needed considerable assistance in the conduct of the meeting.
Ordinarily the meeting is attended by a mere handful of the 3000 or more subscribers, but this time a ball of contention aroused feeling which exhibited itself in keen, but on the whole good-humoured faction spirit.
The controversy was over an appointment of a doctor and the formation of a new area for the purpose of medical and hospital attention. Sometime ago the Hospital Committee, in view of the large sums they were paying yearly in fees for the treatment of their subscribers in other institutions, determine the extensions to their own premises were urgently necessary. During the last year the extensions were practically completed, and a debt of £8000 faced the subscribers.
The committee if you months ago asked the subscribers – the bulk of whom work people the Denaby and Cadeby Main Collieries – to increase their weekly subscription by one penny per man and a halfpenny per boy. A special meeting of the subscribers voted the increase, to extend over five years, and that was a position at the end of the financial year.
Recently the Denaby and Cadeby branches of the Y.M.A. proposed the formation of an additional area, with its own appointed Doctor, this area was to comprise the whole of the new housing estate at present in course of development. A special meeting of subscribers appointed a subcommittee to investigate the proposed and make recommendations. The subcommittee recommended the formation of new area, to which proposal no wholehearted objection was made. But they went beyond that, and in doing so stirred of the excitement which came to a head on Monday. They recommended that the doctor to tend the district be Dr J.M. O’Donnell – who is not at present on the staff of the Fullerton hospital, and is therefore not has no power to enter the place and give attention to any of these patients who might be there. This was a prime point in the proposal to appoint him to the new suggested area.
A £6000 Free Loan
The meeting opened quietly, the formal reports being adopted.
Mr S Johnson, secondly, refer to the gift of the Denaby and Cadeby Collieries Ltd of the interest on a loan of £6000 to make the extensions possible and of coal gas and water supplies. Mr Johnson read the minutes of the last general meeting and of two special meetings of subscribers held since, and to pass the necessary resolution authorising increase in subscriptions already mention to deal with a request by a large number of subscribers that Dr O’Donnell be appointed a member of the hospital staff, to which the meeting did not accede; and the other to deal with the proposal for new area to be set up which was submitted by the Cadeby branch of the Y.M.A. and supported by the Denaby branch.
Mr H Hulley, manager of Cadeby Colliery and treasurer of the Hospital, said the increase of subscriptions had had a very good effect. The extensions, which are now practically completed made the Hospital ”2nd to none in the world.” The premises they are now worth £40,000-£50,000 and had actually cost them £15,000-£16,000. The balance sheet showed them “on the wrong side,” but at the end of five years they anticipated that the whole of the debit balance would be wiped out. They hoped that even then the men would not take off the increase. (A voice: “don’t want to!”)
Keeping Patients “At Home”
Referring to the number of patients they are too hard to send out of the area for hospital treatment, he said they had made up their minds to prevent that in future. And now they had all the accommodation they needed, except for sufferers from affections of eyes, ears or nose. The donations and private subscription amount to £300, including £201 for the Colliery Company in gas, call and water. The subscriptions from workmen total £3541, an increase, thanks to the increased subscription, of £874 over last years. The glass worker had joined the band of subscribers and their contribution amounted to £186. The Cooperative Society’s employees contributed £132 and the total income (including the £6000 loan from the Coral Company) was £10,270.
They began the year with an adverse balance of £1,665. Full et cetera cost six and £42, Ward and Theatre requisites £1,800 – and that included an item off £200 for renewals and repairs which would not be incurred again for a few years – £3,093 for building extension, £691 for fees to other hospitals – on this item, they would save almost £500 in the new year: the District Nursing Association £498, the total expenditure being £10,279 and they had £985 at the bank.
The extensions will cost altogether about £8,500. Never expected to get all they wanted done for £6000, but other requirements had demanded attention, and being essential for the welfare of the subscribers and users, they decided going for them to. They expected that in five years they would have paid off the whole of the £8,500.
He put in a word of praise for the work of the district nurses, who cost them a lot of money, but thoroughly earned it. In the year two of them had made 4715 visits – an average of 10 each day, working 365 days in the year. That was “extraordinarily good work.” The hospitals run as economically as was compatible with comfort and proper care of patients, the average cost per patient per day being 14/11 (74p).
The report was received with loud applause and unanimously adopted.
Officials Sent Back
Dr McArthur give the medical report, which was brief and to the point. It had been the “most momentous year in the history of the hospital.” Beginning of the year that accommodation was inadequate; now they had room for as many patients as they were ever likely to receive at one-time for many days to come. There are 16 beds are been increased to 3 times that number. The work of the district nurse was “very satisfactory.” (Applause)
The item, “Election of officials,” caused the first stir. Mr Hulley rose and appealed for the re-election en bloc of the men who were already serving to enable them to see through the big job they are taken in hand. Several members at once jumped up to protest against this procedure, and there were demands for each official to be separately nominated and voted. Someone proposed the name of Mr Johnson for the secretaryship, and someone proposed another name.
Another man demanded a ballot. The meeting was proceeding to appoint tellers, Mr Brownsword rose and said it was impossible for any number of tellers to count the votes in that hall. He moved they take nominations from the various bodies subscribing to the hospital through their members and take a ballot stop someone second in this proposal, Mr Hulley, amid loud interruption, explained that their rules said they must elect their officials at the annual meeting.
The officials were ultimately re-elected en bloc as suggested, and Mr Tom Hill was then elected without opposition trustee for the Cadeby branch subscribers.
Then Mr Johnson give the report of the New Early subcommittee, briefly outlining the two main proposals described above. He appealed them in concert in that matter “put personal feelings on one side and see from the point of view of the whole body of subscribers.” The subcommittee had honestly tried to give wise counsel on the proposal, and the Hospital Committee agreed with the subcommittee on the formation of the new area, but not on the appointment of the doctor. The hospital Committee recommended the subscribers to agree to formation of the new area, but that the appointment of the doctor for that area be left entirely with the subscribers.
The Doctors Views
Mr Hill, spokesman for the subcommittee, gave a resume of their work. The neighbourhood proposal to be the new area belong to Drs McClure, Ford and King, and the subcommittee fell to their duty first consult them, as they would be considerably affected by the alteration. After hearing the doctor’s view, they got a unanimous vote from the subcommittee.
Dr McClure was and asked to give up part of his area, for which he could demand six months notice, and he was prepared to act amicably with Dr O’Donnell. The subcommittee came to the conclusion that Dr O’Donnell was the man most likely to satisfy the patients to be served. There were 700 people on this panel to be considered, that was a serious item. Before he could go into the hospital he had to be on its staff. They therefore agreed it was the most sensible thing to appoint Dr O’Donnell. They also thought it right that a doctor in charge of an area should be in that area and devote himself to it. Dr McClure agreed to cease work on a new area on and after March 1, and Dr O’Donnell agreed to move his two surgeries into the new area on July 1. The three doctors also agreed in the absence of one or the other, to help each other out.
“It is a long time since we found that principal operating in this district.” (Applause).
The subcommittee went round the district concern and visiting 103 houses, got 108 votes for the arrangement they now put before the subscribers. He moved that the recommendations subcommittee be adopted in their entirety. (Applause)
A subscriber said there were other doctors who have been in the area long and Dr O’Donnell. He proposes appointment of Dr Mitchell, and that a ballot be taken at both pits (loud applause)
Another speaker suggested that it did not matter much who the doctor was, but that his appointment should be left to the people lived in the area to be served.
A Dictatorship
Mr Brownsword asked who paid the doctors. By what authority did Dr McClure lay down conditions? There was a serious implication there against the medical profession, that members of it showed partiality as to whom they worked amicably with. If the subscribers in that district had five doctors working for them, they demanded that they should have the best of the brains of all those doctors. If the doctors were starting to dictate terms, it was time the workers did the dictating and told the doctors to take six month’s notice! (Cheers) he seconded the motion that the appointment be submitted to a ballot, so that those concerned might bought for the doctor in whom they had confidence. (Applause)
A member seconded Mr Hill’s motion for the adoption of the subcommittee’s recommendations as they stood, urging that the opinions of the persons living in the area under discussion were dead in favour of them. He claimed an individual right to say who should enter is how to give medical aid to himself and his family. He did not see why men who lived in another district altogether should be voting on which Doctor he should have.
After further remarks by various speakers and a good deal of uproar, Mr Hill managed to state that they did not appoint either Dr McClure or Dr Forde by ballot. Their rules laid down that on the death of one of their medical men a successor should be appointed in that way, but the matter they were now discussing did not come under that rule. That was to be a new area.
A voice: There will be nowt else done except by ballot!
Another: The only people who have the right to vote are those in the area.
Mr Brownsword then attempt to get the acceptance of the first part of the recommendation – that the new area be formed – but Mr Hill refused to accept that. He said the recommendations must be accepted in their entirety or turned down.
Mr Arthur Roberts tried to soothe the excitement by an appeal for a calm, peaceful settlement of the dispute. He said he was sorry the hospital committee had not accepted the subcommittee’s findings. He did not think it fair to confine the decision to the residents at present in the proposed new area, for the next three years those residents would be doubled and trebled, and newcomers will find themselves having to accept a decision which they had no part. If they talked about taking a ballot there will be “a lot of unpleasantness.” He wanted a peaceful solution, and the most peaceful solution seem to be upset the subcommittee’s findings.
An Allegation of “Smart Tactics”
Another speaker immediately rose and demanded a ballot. Interruptions broke out all of the hall, and for a time nothing was audible. Then someone asked for a lead from the platform. He alleged that somebody had been “got at.” They had discussed the matter several meetings, representatives of four or 5000 work people and some of the delegates sent from those meetings were on the platform will stop their instructions were clear enough, and yet, because of “smart tactics,” or for some other cause, they were deliberately avoiding a ballot or even a show of hands . If the hospital committee had an objection to Dr O’Donnell they should have the courage to state it. he suggests that, by appointing their own representative to handle their business for them, they should now command a lead from those men from the platform.
Mr W Wilkinson, a member of the hospital committee then stated the committee’s position. In the first place they “heard a rumour” about a new area. Then Dr O’Donnell sent in an application for the position that might be created. A fortnight ago they received a similar application from Dr Mitchell. What could they do in face of a position like that? There had two men for the position. That was the reason why they did not fully accept the subcommittee’s recommendations.
Stalemate
Further loud and insistent demand for a ballot were made from various parts of the hall, and Mr Hill interposed with some difficulty, to point out that the meeting could get no further until it has accepted or turned down the recommendations before them. He asked the chairman to put the question.
Mr F Ward, vice-chairman of the committee, but taking the chair on Mr Winpenny having to leave, asked for tellers who were appointed. But the vote was not carried out without further interruption. Mr Brownsword again rose and although he had considerable difficulty in obtaining a hearing managed at last to state his objection to the procedure, on the grounds that the subcommittee had exceeded its mandate. They were simply appointed to investigate the proposal for new area, not to appoint a doctor.
The objection was overruled and ultimately a vote was taken on the plain” Yes” or “no” on the subcommittee’s recommendations.
It resulted as follows: for recommendation 284, against 329.
The result was received with enthusiastic cheering.
The meeting was then closed.