§ 64. Major COHEN
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Lieutenant-Colonel G. M. McLoughlin, T.D., is in receipt of a pension based on the rank of a captain, in spite of the fact that he holds a commission appointing him to the rank of lieutenant-colonel dated 17th September, 1926; that Lieutenant-Colonel McLoughlin was officer-commanding the 20th battalion Cheshire Regiment from I7th September, 1926, to 12th July, 1927, and from 17th August, 2431 1919, holding the position of area commandant in various places, holding the rank of lieutenant-colonel all the time; and if he will state the grounds on which it was decided to award a lieutenant-colonel holding a commission for that rank the pension of a lower rank?
§ Major TRYON
I have been asked by my right hon. Friend to reply. The facts in this case, which are not quite correctly stated in the question, are as follows. Lieutenant-Colonel McLoughlin held the substantive rank of captain. The temporary rank of lieutenant-colonel conferred on him with effect from the 17th September, 1916, whilst commanding a battalion, was relinquished on the 13th July, 1917, and was so notified in the "London Gazette." The officer was demobilised on the 2nd August, 1919. The temporary commission referred to, which was issued to this officer on the 30th October, 1916, was, I am informed by the War Office, issued in error and was in the circumstances neither necessary nor admissible. The officer has been pensioned in the rank appropriate to the information supplied to me by the War Office and the position has been fully explained to him both by that Department and by the Ministry.
§ Major COHEN
Is it not a fact, nevertheless, that this officer does hold a commission of the rank of lieutenant-colonel and if the War Office has made a mistake should not the War Office abide by it?