Morpathia: The latest article about the Morpeth Dispensary - Dr Gostling

This was wholly acceptable to the Committee. One of his predecessors, Mr Thomas Gibson, had served for 34 years until his death in 1863.

Ever since then, the Committee had been clear that they only wanted young men, unmarried, fresh from their training, who would live at the Dispensary – indeed were required to do so – and would leave to go into private practice after a few years.

This was a sound plan. It meant that the resident doctor would always be in the prime of life, unencumbered by wife and family, not prone to the debilitating ills of middle age and able to give his whole attention, or most of it, to the Dispensary.

Dr Paton gave ample notice, they advertised in The Lancet and the British Medical Journal. On April 7, 1884, the Committee put forward the names of three applicants to be considered by the Governors for the post of House Surgeon and on the 17th, Mr Harry Gostling was duly elected.

He took up his duties on or about the 1st of May 1884 and his appointment was recorded in the BMJ:

“Gostling, J. Harry, M.R.C.S. (Eng.), L.S.A., appointed House-Surgeon to the Morpeth Dispensary, vice J. Erskine Paton, M.B., resigned.”

On May 1st, between Mr Paton leaving and Mr Gostling moving in, the Medical Committee inspected the premises. They recommended that:

• The floors be thoroughly cleaned. All bottles to be inspected later.
• Two shelves to be arranged on the west wall for bottles.
• Mr Schofield to take stock of the contents and estimate their value.
• A plain book to be provided for a prescription book for the Medical Officers.
• The Medical Officers to attend as follows: E. Douglas, Monday; A. Brumell, Tuesday; Clarkson, Thursday; Skrimshire, Friday, all at 10 am. In addition, Mr Matthew Brumell might be consulted when needed.

The surgical instruments – “such as they are” – were all filthy and could not be valued until thoroughly cleaned. Mr Schofield reported that the drugs were worth about £13 and about £3 was needed to put the Dispensary on a working footing.

The report speaks for itself and at their ordinary meeting on May 5, the Committee addressed the issue of the cleaning of the dispensary house. I don’t suppose anybody gave it a thought under the rather haphazard arrangements of an earlier day.

No doubt the two Mrs Gibsons (Mr Gibson had been widowed and married again) had kept the whole place clean (it was, after all, their family home) but the situation was different when the house surgeon was a bachelor.

The house surgeon had to employ his own housekeeper. As long as his meals were got and his clothes washed and ironed, a bachelor in his twenties would be unlikely to bother about the general state of the house – so unless the housekeeper was very conscientious, what didn’t need doing didn’t get done.

The Committee now took the view that this was their responsibility, a thing that would have been inconceivable in the days before 1850. Back then, the Committee consisted largely of country gentlemen who treated it as an honorary office and never actually met.

Then in 1850, a few cronies – led by the Rector, or more accurately by his curate – attempted to dismiss Mr Gibson and the two honorary surgeons so they could take over the running of the Dispensary themselves.

Happily, they were thwarted and a proper committee was put in charge made up of trades- and professional men from the town.

The reformed Committee took their responsibilities seriously, meeting on the first Monday of every month and keeping proper minutes and other records.

Even so, it seems to have been a long time before it dawned upon them that nobody was actually responsible for keeping the house clean. Having done so, they decided that the doctor should be allowed 1/- a week for expenses in cleaning the dispensary and waiting room!

They also resolved that the Letter of Recommendation, aka the Dispensary Ticket, should be revised to show the year of issue, viz. 1884, and 1,000 copies printed.

This was a new development, presumably to avoid lots of old tickets turning up and overwhelming the rather slender resources of the Dispensary and to encourage subscribers to give their tickets to the poor people they were intended for, and not to hoard them.

By this time, the churches in Morpeth had got used to the idea of supporting the Dispensary. In June, the offertory at St James’s was devoted to it and in October, a sermon was preached on its behalf at the Wesleyan Chapel in Manchester Street.

When Dr Paton submitted his resignation, it had been proposed by two medical members of the Committee – both, incidentally, former house surgeons – that the salary should be £100 p.a., though it had been £120 for more than seven years.

Yet on November 3, at a special meeting of the Governors, it was proposed by Mr Greenwood, seconded by Dr Skrimshire, that the salary revert to £120 p.a.

Mr Gostling had only been in post for six months, so why did they suddenly do this and why had Dr Skrimshire changed his mind? I don’t know, but I should guess it was meant as a form of probation while they decided if the new man would do.

What they might have done if he didn’t is not at all clear and the experiment, though proposed once or twice thereafter, was never repeated.

The Dispensary owned a valuable piece of real property, namely the house. At the December committee meeting, following a question about the financial state of the Institution, it was noted that Mr Bullock, a wealthy gentleman who lived near Mitford, was the sole trustee of the title deeds.

They agreed to approach him, with a view to conveying the deeds to the other trustees.

At the annual meeting on January 30, 1885, Dr Gostling presented his first medical report, for 1884:

“During the year there have been 480 patients admitted to the benefits of this Institution. Of these, 416 were cured; 22 relieved; 32 died; and 10 remained on the books. The causes of deaths were: Phthisis, 11; Senile Decay, 6; Marasmus, 1; Cerebral Hemorrhage (sic), 2; Obstructive Jaundice, 1; Syphilis, 1; Heart disease, 1; Bronchitis and Pneumonia, 4; Hydrocephalus, 1; Meningitis, 1; General Tuberculosis, 2, Enteritis, 1. …

“The ages of those admitted, 5 years and under, 110; above 5 years, 370.

“The following is a list of the more important diseases attended: Bronchitis, Pneumonia and Pleurisy, 83; Tonsillitis, 21, Dyspepsia, 77; Rheumatism, 24; Diarrhoea, 37; Ophthalmia, 16; Phthysis, 12; Whooping Cough, 6; Erysipelas, 8; Accidents, 40; Heart disease, 8; Diphtheria, 3; Typhoid, 1; Peritonitis and Enteritis, 3; Bright’s Disease, 3 – J. Harry Gostling, House Surgeon.”

Marasmus is where a baby fails to thrive, essentially starving to death. Phthisis is consumption, aka tuberculosis. The predominance of chest and throat diseases amongst the poor of Morpeth is too obvious to call for further comment.