§ 28. Mr. WEDGWOODasked the Home Secretary, with reference to the case of John Smith, of Tunstall, who escaped from the workhouse in workhouse clothes, was imprisoned for technically stealing those clothes, and so lost his old age pension, whether, seeing that the workhouse 122 master, on whose report it was that his-conviction was not quashed and his pension restored, has since been sent to prison, he is now prepared to reopen the case?
§ Mr. McKENNAAfter full consideration of the circumstances, I am sorry that I must adhere to the decision that the case is not one for a free pardon. The suspension of right to pension will end in August next.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODDoes not the right hon. Gentleman consider that, as the officer upon whose report he refused to allow this man a free pardon, has himself been sent to prison for gross illegalities, he might reopen the case and allow the man to have that part of the pension of which he has been unjustly deprived?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, Sir. I went fully into the circumstances of the case, and I was bound to come to the conclusion that John Smith was not a man to whom a free pardon should be given.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODI know the man very well. He is a very decent man.
§ 44. Mr. WATSONasked the Secretary to the Treasury to whom an old age pensioner should apply for payment of the weekly orders which have been inadvertently mislaid by such pensioner and not found until more than three months had elapsed from the due date of the last order, and as to which the local pension officer has declined to receive or transmit to his superiors any representation?
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Montagu)On the facts stated payment of the orders in question-would prima facie be precluded by the pro visions of Section 5 (b) of the Old Age Pensions Act, 1911, but if the hon. Member will communicate the full facts to the Board of Customs and Excise, inquiry will be made.