§ *LORD CASTLETOWNMy Lords, I rise to ask His Majesty's Government the rather long string of Questions standing in my name, viz.: (1) What evidence was tendered before the Local Government Board Committee of Enquiry with regard to the proposed sanatorium at Streamhill which warranted the Board in stating they would not with hold sanction of a loan? See letter, 16th March, 1908. (2) Whether it is a fact that the two arbitrators appointed to decide the conflicting views of the ratepayers were the same gentlemen who approved the site in the first instance, and whether this is considered a proper form of arbitration? (3) Whether the views of the ratepayers have been obtained as to the heavy expenditure proposed? (4) Whether any real practical medical expert on tuberculosis has examined the proposed site? (5) Whether it is not a fact that all experts now agree that temporary wooden houses, and not stone buildings, are the proper typos for use in sanatoria; and whether the Local Government Board will protect the ratepayers by having this question investigated by competent authorities before any unnecessary or additional expenditure is incurred? (6) Whether the purported gift of land does not contain peculiar legal provisions as to resumption, and whether these provisions have been fully considered by the Board or their legal representative?
1003 In putting these Questions I should like to say a few words explanatory of my reasons for doing so. Those who are acting with me in this matter have no wish to prevent proper sanatoria for consumptive patients being built in any portion of Ireland. We are most anxious to see the work now being carried on in Ireland so well against tuberculosis carried on to the fullest extent. But at the same time we desire to prevent, so far as possible, the ratepayers' money being wasted in schemes which may be neither suitable nor advisable. The story of how the question arose is a very simple one. An Act was passed some few years ago which enabled the county council of any part of Ireland to appoint what were called joint hospital boards, and, once they were appointed, they were prepared to spend any sum of money which was considered fair by the county council in building sanatoria for consumptive patients. The effect has been that in some parts of Ireland, I believe in two parts, very proper places have been selected, and, I believe, fairly successful sanatoria have been started. In the district with which I am dealing, where we desired to protect as much as possible the interests of the ratepayers, we considered that the joint hospital board did not act very wisely. They selected what we considered, and are informed by medical officers to be, improper places for sanatoria for consumptive patients; and are also preparing to waste the ratepayers' money in erecting a stone building which is unsuitable, as we are informed, on the best possible authority, that these sanatoria should all be wooden erections and capable of being destroyed after the lapse of a certain number of years. Therefore, I feel I am acting in the interests of the ratepayers in the county of Cork in putting these questions; and I would ask the Government to give us some information on the subject.
LORD DENMANMy noble friend has raised a question of considerable importance, at all events locally; and perhaps, with the permission of the House, I may be allowed to give a short history of the matter. In the year 1904 it was represented to the Local Government Board in Ireland that there was urgent need for a sanatorium in the county of Cork; and the Local Government Board, by a Provisional Order 1004 confirmed by Parliament, authorised the formation of a joint board consisting of representatives of the sanitary authorities in the county of Cork and of the Cork Corporation for the purpose of providing a sanatorium for the county. As I have no doubt many Members of this House are aware, it is a very difficult thing to obtain a site for a hospital for either infectious or contagious disease. The residents in the district invariably enter strong objection; and frequently it is necessary to seek compulsory powers. The joint board had before it schemes for two sites, but such strenuous opposition was offered to either of those sites being adopted that the Local Government Board did not consider themselves justified in allowing the matter to go further.
Mr. Brasier Creagh then came forward and himself offered to provide a site for a sanatorium. Now, when a free gift is made of a site it is not necessary, I understand, to ask the sanction of the Local Government Board. It is true the Local Government Board have power whereby they can block such a scheme going forward; but, looking to the fact that it was impossible, or extremely difficult, to obtain a site without compulsory powers, and looking to the fact that this was a free gift, the Local Government Board considered that it would be a rather highhanded action on their part were they to prevent its going forward. Then, when this offer had been made by Mr. Brasier Creagh, a committee was appointed by the joint board, consisting, no doubt, of men most competent to deal with the subject. This committee, with their, sanitary engineer, inquired into the question of the site, and reported unanimously in favour of it. After that, the Chief Engineering Inspector, Mr. Cowan, and the Medical Inspector, Dr. Biggar, of the Local Government Board, went down and made an inspection of the site; on their advice the Local Government Board authorised an inquiry being held into the matter.
The inquiry, I may say, was held by Mr. Cowan and Dr. Biggar, and notice that it was to be held was advertised in newspapers circulating throughout the county. In the notice all the ratepayers were invited to attend and to make any objection to the loan being 1005 sanctioned. At the inquiry evidence was given for and against this particular proposal; and I may say that although the Local Government Board were not directly called upon to approve of the site, the inspectors thought it better not to exclude e vide ace upon that point; and, accordingly, they gave every opportunity to witnesses for stating their views on that matter. The only professional evidence given against the scheme was that, of Dr. Corby, Professor of Midwifery in Queen's College, Cork, who, however, admitted that he had not seen the site before he gave evidence oil the question. It is only fair, however, to Dr. Corby to say that he has since seen the site, and has furnished a report supporting the conclusion he arrived at before he had seen the site. The only other professional evidence was that of Mr. Hall, a Fellow of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. No doubt the opinion of a veterinary surgeon is of great value upon this as upon all other points. The Local Government Board had to consider the professional evidence for and against. On the one hand they had the committee of the joint board, with their sanitary engineer; they had the evidence of their own medical export and their own inspecting sanitary engineer. Against those, they had the evidence of the Queen's College professor who had not seen the site, and the evidence of a veterinary surgeon from Cork. I submit that in view of the nature of the evidence it was impossible for the Local Government Board to do otherwise than to sanction the loan of £12,000 for the erection of the hospital buildings.
Now, perhaps, I had better answer categorically the other questions that my noble friend has put. The first, I think, I have already dealt with. Then, the second question he asks is whether it is a fact that the two arbitrators appointed to decide the conflicting views of the ratepayers were the same gentlemen who approved the site in the first instance, and whether this is considered a proper form of arbitration. My noble friend, I am informed, is not correct in referring to the two inspectors as arbitrators. The inquiry was not in the nature of an arbitration. The function of the inspectors was to receive evidence tendered at the inquiry, and to report upon it. Then I come to the third question, 1006 whether the views of the ratepayers have been obtained as to the expenditure proposed. The ratepayers were invited to attend and give evidence at the inquiry of which I have spoken. Then, there is Question 4, whether really any practical medical expert on tuberculosis has examined the proposed site. In answer to that, the Local Government Board say they are satisfied that no additional evidence is necessary as regards suit ability of the proposed site. Now, I come to Question 5. I am bound to say that I am just a little surprised at the form in which my noble friend has placed that Question on the Paper. He asks whether it is not a fact that "all experts now agree." My experience is that I have never known experts to agree upon any subject whatever; and the answer I would give to him would be a direct negative. But I believe the prevailing opinion among medical men is that some of the buildings, at all events, should be of a temporary as opposed to a permanent character. The Local Government Board, in their letter of March 16th, state that they require the plans of the building amended, with a view to securing economy, and the loan will not be finally sanctioned until the Board are satisfied that the plans are suitable.
In answer to Question 6, with regard to the gift of land containing peculiar legal provisions, the Local Government Board say that the deed conveying the site does contain some conditions which are unusual, but the Board are satisfied that they are not unreasonable. I hope I have shown that the ratepayers' money will not be wasted, as the noble Lord appears to fear, and that every care was taken before this site was chosen. I can assure him that everything will be done to secure that the proposed sanatorium shall be erected in conformity with the most modern regulations and requirements.
§ *LORD CASTLETOWNMy Lords, I am sorry to trespass further upon your Lordships' indulgence. I thank the noble Lord for so kindly and exhaustively answering my Questions. But there are one or two points upon which I think I ought to clear myself. Question 2 I put because I think it is a very remarkable fact, and the Local Government 1007 Board should bear it in mind in the future, that the Cork inspectors who were sent down to examine this land, which we know to be absolutely unsuitable for a sanatorium, were the same men who were appointed to hear the objections of the ratepayers to their own Report. That may be a very Irish proceeding, but I do not think it is a very proper one. We asked that other experts should be brought down to hear our objections, and we would have procured a great deal more evidence than my noble friend has cited if we had been treated in a proper manner by the two gentlemen who were acting, as we call it, as arbitrators on this question. But, naturally, when we came before the two men who were pledged to a particular site and to a particular scheme, it was very difficult for us to make our objections felt. With regard to Question 5, as to the agreement of experts, I can only indorse what the noble Lord had said, that experts do not always agree. But there is a general consensus of opinion that temporary wooden houses, and not stone buildings, are the proper types for sanatoria. With regard to the gift of land, I want to say, and I say it with all deference to the gentlemen who made this munificent gift, that there is in this legal document a very remarkable clause. The clause is that if any consumptive patient goes outside the wall enclosure round this land during treatment at the sanatorium, the gift will be null and void, and will revert to the donor. That, I venture to say, is a very remarkable legal arrangement; and I would ask my noble friend to suggest to the Local Government Board that they should look into the question of this deed of gift. It is not for me to say more on the question. I know there is a very strong feeling in our district on the subject; and I say, from the absolute knowledge of experts who have been over the ground and from the commonsense knowledge of any human being who knows anything at all about consumption, that a more unsuitable spot could not have been chosen. It is boggy, cold, clayey land facing all the wildest winds from the Atlantic; and I hope the Local Government Board, before they absolutely complete the arrangement, will look seriously into the question of the site.