§ Mr. KELLYasked the grounds on which the Local Government Board for Ireland refused to continue the pension granted to Bridget Collum, Ballybofey, county Donegal, by the Stranorlar sub-committee from the 1st January, 1910; whether the Local Government Board considered the evidence that Bridget Collum's name does not appear in the Census of 1841 on account of her being living at that time with her grandparents in Cloughernymore, county Donegal, a district in which no policeman was then allowed to set foot; whether the Local Government Board took into consideration the facts that this woman's eldest son is at present over fifty years of age, and that she can prove that she is two years older than her brother Michael, who is returned as two years old in the 886 Census of 1841; and whether, in view of these facts, the Local Government Board are prepared to reconsider their decision depriving her of her pension?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Local Government Board allowed the pension officer's question in this case as they were not satisfied from the evidence submitted that the pensioner had reached the statutory age. No information was before them as to her residence with her grandparents when the Census of 1841 was taken. According to her own statement, her eldest child is now forty-six years old, and there is no satisfactory proof that she is older than her brother Michael. It is not open to the Board to reconsider their decision.
§ Mr. AUGUSTINE ROCHEasked the Chief Secretary whether he was aware that James O. Mahoney, Mill Road, Mill-street, was granted a pension on the 1st January, 1909, and continued to receive it till the 23rd March, 1910, when it was withdrawn on the appeal of the pension officer; whether he had produced testimony from respectable men who know him intimately that he is eighty years of age; whether he would state on what grounds his pension was disallowed; and would further inquiries be made with a view to having this old man's claim allowed?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Local Government Board disallowed the question raised by the pension officer in this case as the pensioner's age was recorded in the Census-Returns as being only one month in 1841 and ten years in 1851. The testimony of those who supported his claim was to the effect that they believed him to be about seventy-two years of age. Having given their decision the Board have no power to take further action in the matter as. suggested.