§ Mr. JOHN ROCHEasked the Chief Secretary whether Mrs. Catherine Silk, of Beech Hill, New Inn, county Galway, has been deprived of her pension in consequence of a Census Return giving her age as sixty-seven years; whether a certificate was supplied to the pension officer giving the date of her marriage as 10th January, 1859, also a certificate of birth of her child, giving the date 19th October, 1859; and whether, in face of such evirence, he will direct that the pension be restored to this woman?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Local Government Board upheld the appeal of the pension officer as the name of Catherine Silk was not found in the Census Return of her parents' family in 1841, while her age was recorded as being only nine years in 1851. A marriage certificate was furnished as stated, but the Board did not consider that it was sufficient to prove that Mrs. Silk had reached the statutory age.
§ Mr. LONSDALEasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that William Pawley, of Canary (Moy), county Armagh, having been granted an old age pension of 2s. a week, which was paid to him from 1st January, 1909, to 15th May, 1909, was deprived of the same, upon a decision of the Local Government Board, upon a claim being made by Pawley for 5s. a week, that he was not entitled to any pension; whether the legality of this decision was contested, and the Court of Appeal quashed the order of the Local Government Board; and whether directions will be given that Pawley shall be paid the arrears of his pension since 15th May last?
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Hobhouse)Directions have been given in this case for payment to William Pawley of all arrears of pension from 14th May last.
§ Mr. O'DOWDasked whether John and Bridget Walsh, of Drimina, Kilmactigue, Tubbercurry, county Sligo, have been deprived of their pensions; and, if so, can he state the grounds on which such pensions have been withdrawn?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThese pensions have been withdrawn, in the case of John Walsh by the Local Government Board on appeal, and in the case of Bridget Walsh by the pension committee, on the ground that the pensioners had not attained the statutory age.
§ Mr. BOLANDasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that Mrs. O'Shea, of Cools, Emlaghmore, Cahir-civeen, county Kerry, has not yet been notified that she is entitled to draw an old age pension, although the hon. Member for South Kerry has been informed that she is so entitled; and whether payment will be made as from the day when the pension became due?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe decision of the Local Government Board that the claimant would attain the age of seventy years on the 1st inst. was communicated to the pension sub-committee on 7th February last, and it thereupon became the duty of the sub-committee to notify her of the Board's decision. The payment of pensions is not a matter over which I have any control.
§ Mr. SCANLANasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state why Patrick M'Andrew, Mrs. Margaret Sexton, and Patrick Conlan, all of Templeboy, county Sligo, have been deprived of their pensions by the Local Government Board; what evidence against their claims was produced to the Board; and whether the grounds of the decisions were communicated to the pension subcommittee?
§ Mr. BIRRELLIn these cases the pension officer raised questions on the ground that the pensioners had not reached the statutory age, and on appeal the Local Government Board decided in his favour, as it appeared from the Census Returns that Patrick M'Andrew was only eight years old in 1851, that Margaret Sexton was nine years old in 1851, and not recorded among her parents' family in 1841; and that Patrick Conlan was eight years old in 1851, and not recorded among his parents' family in 1841. The Board when notifying their decisions use the form of notification prescribed by the Regulations and do not give the grounds of their decisions, but when asked for their reasons they are prepared to state them. In these three cases the pension sub-committee were aware of the reasons, as the pension officer's questions had come before them in the first instance.