§ Mr. T. M. HEALYasked the Chief Secretary when the Local Government Board found that the maternity nursing in Mitchelstown workhouse was unsatisfactory and that the medical officer frequently so reported within the past two years, why was no step taken by them to improve these defects in the interest of the sick poor; on what grounds did they couple the medical officer as deserving of the caution given to the midwife; and will he be relieved of the imputation of blame for a state of things which he has persistently protested against?
§ Mr. BIRRELLDuring the last three years the medical officer made several complaints to the Mitchelstown Board of Guardians in regard to alleged neglect of duty on the part of the midwife. The Local Government Board wrote to the guardians asking them to investigate these charges, and it would appear from the minutes of the board of guardians that in practically every case they considered the explanations furnished by the midwife satisfactory. At the same time the Local Government Board had to call the attention of the guardians to the disputes which were taking place between other officers of the workhouse, and although the guardians themselves tried to put an end to the friction that existed between the officers in question, it was necessary in the end for the board to hold a sworn inquiry into the causes of the quarrels that were continually taking place in the institution. The inspector who held the inquiry reported that there had been bad298W feeling between the medical officer and the midwife for several years past, and the board accordingly advised the guardians to caution these two officers to refrain from giving further cause of offence.