GRAND JURIES (IRELAND). (Hansard, 10 February 1837)

§ Lord Clements
was opposed to the repeal of this proviso. He did not consider dispensaries as beneficial to the poor. He knew of a case in which a surgeon to an hospital received from 100l.to 200l. a-year for the trifling service of visiting an hospital twice a week. He thought the subject ought more properly to be introduced into the Poor-law Bill. The expense to the county was not what he objected to, but the opinion he entertained of the inutility of these establishments.

Mr. O'Connell
hoped the clause would be maintained. The proviso would be found to act inconveniently, especially in those districts of Ireland such as his own, in which the medical attendant could derive little additional remuneration from private practice.

§ Mr. Wakley
also hoped that the clause would be retained. He had received many communications, showing the great inconvenience which had resulted from the proviso. The cupidity of some persons might lead them to undertake the medical superintendence of an extensive district, which it was physically impossible that they 434 could properly attend to; but the Legislature ought not to hold an encouragement to such a system.

§ Mr. Shaw
could confirm the statement of the hon. and learned Gentleman, that a general complaint was made in Ireland at the prospect of the effect of the clause of the Act of last year, which limited the salary of the medical attendant to a moiety of the private subscriptions, and he could add a case within his own knowledge in the county of Dublin, where, in a neighbourhood in which he was much interested, a dispensary had been recently established, and which could not continue to exist, if the medical attendant was not allowed a larger remuneration than the half of the private subscriptions; he quite approved of the repeal of that clause.

§ Mr. French
assured the hon. Member for Finsbury, his Irish correspondents had been amusing themselves with his credulity, as to the injurious effects of the clause in the late Bill, to which he had alluded, such as depriving the poor of Ireland of medical assistance. That clause had not as yet come into operation; its provisions had never been acted upon; no assizes had been held since the passing of the Act in which it was embodied, and, in fact, matters were at that moment in precisely the same state as they were previous to its introduction. The hon. Member perfectly misunderstood both his noble Friend, the Member for Leitrim, and himself, if he imagined they were not anxious medical assistance should be afforded to the poorer classes of their fellow-countrymen. For his own part, he was desirous that professional skill and medical assistance should universally, throughout Ireland, be provided for the peasantry, and that fair and ample remuneration should be secured to the gentleman devoting his time and abilities to their services. The hon. Member for Kilkenny had alluded to the dispensary in his immediate neighbourhood, and stated that thousands of persons would be deprived of professional assistance if this clause was rejected, as the medical attendant could not continue if his salary was reduced. The dispensary was all he had to depend on. From the poorness of the district, notwithstanding its great extent, 5l. could not in the year be calculated on [from any other quarter. Now, although he (Mr. French) was not aware of the circumstances of that particular dispensary, from his general know- 435 ledge on the subject, he would venture to assert the salary of the medical attendant did not exceed 70l. or 80l. a-year. [Mr. O'Connell stated across the House—75l.] Was 75l., he would ask, a sum sufficient to remunerate a gentleman of skill and education; or could it be expected for anything so paltry, persons competent to discharge the duties could be found? The present system could not be rendered effective, nor under a salary of 300l. a-year could qualified persons be found in all medical appointments, whether to hospitals, infirmaries, or dispensaries; all favouritism and jobbery should be guarded against; an examination should take place before the Board of the College of Surgeons in Dublin, and the best qualified should be the person appointed to each vacancy. As he was on his legs, he would wish to call the attention of the noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, to the Netterville Dispensary, in order to induce him to adopt some measure to render that institution useful to a very poor and impoverished district in the city of Dublin. Two of the trustees appointed under Lord Netterville's will had, he understood, declined taking any share of the duties on themselves, and the third only troubled himself to the extent of nominating the officers and discharging the accounts. The institution ought not to be considered a private one; the parishioners were called on to contribute to its support; a committee of management ought to be appointed, and the advantage of a parochial dispensary afforded to the poor.

§ Viscount Morpeth
said, that he should certainly retain the clause. There had arisen under the old system an abuse which the Act of last year had been intended to remove; but it had been found that the proviso inserted for that purpose was not the proper means of remedying that abuse, and that it had the effect of rendering the remuneration of a medical attendant most scanty in districts which did not happen to be opulent. He regretted, that the dispensary was beyond the power of Government, as it was in the Court of Chancery.