56

THE FIFTH DISTRICT MEETING.

THE fifth district meeting was held in the HighburyAthenaeum on Friday, under the presidency of the Duke (

of Westminster. The Duchess of Westminster was also I

present. In opening the proceedings,The Duke of WESTMINSTER said the object of the 1

meeting, like that of its predecessors, was to awaken the t

public, especially through the agency of the press, to aninterest in the Hospital Fund. A great debt of gratitudewas due to the press for its efforts in the cause, withoutwhich, indeed, the promoters of the movement wouldbe absolutely powerless. The coming election would

1probably distract attention from the movement, and theprevailing agricultural and commercial depression wouldalso act prejudicially against it. In London too, fromits vast size, there was a want of local feeling andinterest; and hence the subdivision of effort that had beenmade during the week. The matter was one affecting richand poor alike. To the poor man it was of the utmost im-portance that his sickness should receive prompt attention,and he could nowhere receive such effective treatment as ina London hospital. The rich also were benefited by theenlarged experience gained in hospitals by those whoattended their families. Hospitals were not so liable toabuse as many other charities, and there was no object towhich public charity could be so fitly directed. The supportof the hospitals fell at present on a very limited number ofindividuals. The subscribers numbered only 40,000 personsout of 4,000,000. Surely the burden ought to fall on a widerarea. The amount required next Sunday was said to be.680,000; the amount hitherto collected was less than halfthat amount. Besides the general wants of maintenance,there were special wants to be met in the No. 5 district.University College Hospital required enlargement and agreat deal of rebuilding, entailing a large outlay. The SohoHospital for Women also required enlargement, so as toaccommodate a larger number of patients. A site had beenselected for the North London Central Hospital, but suffi-cient funds had not been received to enable the committeeto begin building. A great deal of interest had been takenin another matter which was in one sense connected withhospitals. There was a Bill in Parliament for acquiring theopen space known as Parliament-hill, near Hampstead, and,if that addition to the Heath could be made, probably lessfunds would be needed for the North London Hospital, andthe health of the metropolis would be largely promoted.

Sir SYDNEY WATERLOW moved the first resolution,pledging the meeting to use their best exertions to promotethe efficiency of the London hospitals, and urging ministersof religion to make an earnest appeal for increased contri-butions, sothatthe whole sum collected might not b6, less than.680,000. He said that no money was collected for charitablepurposes in London at so small an expense as that collectedfor the hospitals. None of it was wasted in transit, butwent direct to the object for which it was given. Grantswere made by the Hospital Fund to 115 institutions, accord-ing to their needs and merits, which were inquired intowith the greatest care. The amount collected in 1885 was£34,320, contributed mainly in 1597 places of worship. Ina rich place like London that was not an adequate amount,and he hoped it would be largely increased. Even if the£80,000 asked for by the Duke of Westminster were givenit would only provide about one-fifth of the total amountthat had to be collected. The wants of the hospitals wereconstantly increasing, not only for the inhabitants ofLondon, but to meet the applications often made from theprovinces. Increased expenses had to be met for the im-proved nursing and the additional cleanliness attending it,for surgical appliances, and other demands.

Mr. C. LAMBERT, in seconding the resolution, urged theclaims of the hospitals in the district, and expressed a hopethat the utmost endeavours would be made to meet theirpressing demands.The resolution was unanimously adopted.Mr. INCE, M.P., moved: "That this meeting regrets to

learn that the expenditure of the hospitals and medicalcharities of this district in the year 1885 exceeded theincome by £4500, and pledges itself to increased exertionwith a view to preventing any deficiency during the currentyear." He said that the support of London hospitals wasnot so much a matter of charity or benevolence as it was a

matter of duty. He knew that times were hard, for evenlawyers felt the pressure; but a great deal of money waswasted that might be turned to better uses. If those whosought to "cut out" their neighbours, to have smartercarriages and higher-stepping horses, or to give more dinnerparties, would only think of the little use they were doingin comparison with that attending the support of hos-pitals they would expend their money differently. Nowthat there were so many divisions in society, political andreligious, all might unite with advantage in the hospitalmovement; and most assuredly nothing would be found topay so well as the good that was done to our fellow-men.

Mr. BURDETT, in seconding the resolution, said that ifhospitals ever came upon the rates all persons would haveto pay for them, and the cost would be infinitely greaterthan under the voluntary system. The condition of countrieswithout hospitals was simply frightful, as might be seenby the descriptions that had been given of the hideous de-formities in China, where a broken limb had to unite as itbest could. The development that had taken place inhospitals was well illustrated by the contrast between thestate of the Hotel Dieu in Paris ninety years ago (whensome of the beds contained four or five or more patients)and its present highly satisfactory condition. In the fifthdistrict there was about to be constructed one of the besthospitals in London, of which a prominent feature wouldbe the introduction of the provident system, which wouldentitle it to a proportionately larger grant than that givento hospitals where no such element existed.The motion was unanimously adopted.Sir E. HAY CURRIE, in proposing a vote of thanks to the

chairman, alluded to the dreadful results that would attendany impairment of hospital efficiency in London. He alsopaid a tribute to the efforts of the press in promoting thehospital movement, and to Dr. Wakley and to Mr. Burdettfor having set the ball rolling.Mr.WILLETT seconded the motion,which was unanimously

adopted, and was briefly acknowledged by the chairman.

THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGE AND THE

MARQUIS OF SALISBURY ATSTRATFORD.

ON Saturday afternoon the Hospitals Week was broughtto a close by a crowded and enthusiastic meeting heldin the Stratford Town-hall. The chair was taken byMr. E. R. Cook, and there were present Sir E. Currie, Mr.Carr Gomm, Sir T. F. Buxton, Mr. H. C. Burdett, Mr. J. H.Buxton, Colonel FitzGeorge, Captain Storer Smith, Messrs.Custance, Meeson, F. Young, A. Johnston, Ashton Warner,T. Mitchell, A. H. Haggard, and Nixon, Dr. S. Mackenzie, theBishop of Colchester, the Rev. Canon Scott, the Rev. W.Reaney, and several clergymen and ministers.The Duke of CAMBRIDGE moved the first resolution,

which pledged the meeting to arouse the inhabitants ofthe district to the importance of maintaining medicalcharities in efficiency, and urged the clergy and ministers toappeal for increased subscriptions, so that Hospital Sundaymight produce not less than .680,000. His Royal Highnesssaid he had the honour of being president of two greathospitals in this part of London, the London Hospital andthe German Hospital. In that district they had a deficiencyof .616,000, which was their proportion of the deficiencyof .640,000 or .650,000 for the whole of London. Heobserved from the statistics that last year no fewer than amillion patients were treated in all the hospitals ofLondon, and that the total cost was .6500,000. That gavethe singularly small figure of 10s. per patient. If they couldnot keep the hospitals going a sad calamity would fallupon the community at large. The sum collected lastyear in connexion with Hospital Sunday was £40,000;it fell £40,000 short of the requirements of the Londonhospitals. This was why the large figure of .680,000 waspresented to them on the resolution. The amount collectedwas 9s. per patient, and now they wanted to make it 10s.per head. These were marvellous facts. It was hardlyknown to the public how large an amount was expended,how small was the average expenditure on the individualpatients, and how large a number of patients were repre-sented by the additional shilling required. (Hear, hear.)