HC Deb 07 March 1916 vol 80 cc1351-4
43. Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Patrick Mahone, of the Northamptonshire Regiment, is an inmate of the workhouse at Great Yarmouth; that he is now seriously ill, suffering from the after effects of gas; that his discharge from the Army was marked unfit for service; and that he has not been awarded a pension; will he say whether it is the intention of the Government to allow this man to remain in the workhouse; and, if not, will he take immediate steps to see that he is provided with an adequate pension so that he may spend the remainder of his days in such ease and comfort as his condition will allow?

Mr. TENNANT

I am having inquiry made into this case, and will let my hon. Friend know the result.

62. Mr. PRINGLE

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that Charles Dow, 6th Cameron Highlanders, was discharged from the Army on 28th January as unfit for service with a pension of 6s. 3d. per week; whether he is incapable of doing light work; if so, whether he will explain how 6s. 3d. per week can be taken as sufficient pension for a man incapable of such work; and, if he is capable of light work, whether the War Office could retain him for such work instead of withdrawing medically unfit men from civil employments in which they are specially skilled and so disorganising the industries of the country?

Mr. TENNANT

This man was judged by the medical authorities to be capable of light work, and his pension was fixed accordingly. It has not been represented to the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital that he is incapable of such work; but if application to that effect is made to the Commissioners he will be further medically examined and his case reviewed

Mr. PRINGLE

Would it not be better to keep him in the Army rather than take men from civil employments for this purpose?

Mr. TENNANT

He will be put to work which he is capable of doing.

63. Mr. JOWETT

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he will inquire into the circumstances under which Rifleman J. T. Taylor, No. 12,611, of the 21st King's Royal Rifle Corps, was induced to sign a declaration on Army Form O 1,838 indicating that he made no claim on behalf of his parents for separation allowance when, in point of fact, he was to the best of his knowledge and belief applying for separation allowance and should have had his attention drawn to an alternative form of declaration which is obscurely placed on the inside pages of the same Army Form; whether he is aware that the secretary of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Families Dependants Relief Committee at Bradford reports that there are a number of cases where mothers are only receiving payment of allotment and no Government separation allowance on account of their sons not having completed Army Form O 1,838 in the proper manner to give effect to their intention, owing to the fact that they have either been misinformed or have not had the matter fully explained to them; and if he will give Rifleman Taylor an opportunity of amending his declaration to make it correspond with the facts, as he intended it to do?

Mr. FORSTER

I will make inquiry, and give the man an opportunity of amending his declaration; but he signed a perfectly clear and definite statement that he made no claim to separation allowance, and there is no evidence whatever that he was induced to do this.

64. Captain CASSEL

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office (1) whether a soldier's wife who enters an infirmary or sanatorium maintained out of the rates forfeits her separation allowance, while a soldier's wife who enters a hospital does not do so; if so, what is the reason for this distinction; (2) whether he is aware that in many districts soldiers' wives requiring treatment are compelled to go to an infirmary or a sanatorium by reason of hospital accommodation not being available, and thereby lose their separation allowances and are treated as paupers; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter; and (3) whether he will consider the advisability of allowing soldiers' wives entering an infirmary or sanatorium to retain their separation allowances, a reasonable amount out of such allowances being paid to the guardians or other authority?

Mr. FORSTER

When a soldier's wife leaves her home under the conditions named, the allowances payable to the children are raised to the motherless rate, but if the institution is supported out of the rates, no payment in relief of rates is made unless the soldier was himself making one. In that case it is continued, within the amount available. If the institution is not supported out of the rates, there is no bar to payment. The soldier's allotment is paid to the wife while in a rate-supported institution, for her personal use. These arrangements appear to me to meet the situation adequately.

Mr. CASSEL

Does the hon. Gentleman think that the situation is adequately met by depriving of separation allowance a soldier's wife who, through no fault of her own, is obliged to go into the infirmary, compelling her to go in as a pauper instead of as a paying patient?

Mr. FORSTER

With great deference, I do not think she is treated as a pauper. She has the husband's allotment paid to her for her own personal use.

Mr. CASSEL

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, no payment being made to the guardians, she goes in as a pauper? If she does go in as a pauper, will he reconsider the situation?

Mr. FORSTER

I will look into the case again.