§ Mr. WILLIAM REDMONDasked the Secretary to the Treasury why the claim for a pension was not allowed in the case of Mrs. Frances Casey, Morrogh, Ballyvaughan, county Clare; whether Mrs. Casey enjoyed a pension for some time; and what were the grounds on which it was withdrawn?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI understand that the pension originally granted to Mrs. Casey was revoked in 1909 by the Local Government Board on a question raised by the pension officer, and that a second claim preferred in 1910 was also disallowed by the Local Government Board on appeal. The reason for the decision is not stated on the notice sent to the pension officer.
§ Mr. DEVLINasked the same right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the grounds upon which an old age pension 154W was refused to Miss Maria M'Aleese, of Ardnaglass, county Antrim, were that the Census Return for 1841 showed that her mother, Bridget M'Aleese, was then sixteen years of age, and that Bridget M'Aleese herself made a declaration that she was nineteen years of age when she married; whether he is aware that Thomas Hillis, who is over seventy years of age, has made a sworn affidavit that he always regarded Maria M'Aleese as being about two years older than himself, that Alice Graffon made a sworn declaration that Maria M'Aleese's mother is now about ninety-six years of age, and that Bridget M'Aleese has sworn that her daughter must be over seventy years of age; whether he is aware that Father Bradley, of Ahoghill, has certified that he searched the register of marriages for 1837 but could not find the names of Maria M'Aleese's father and mother, because the register was in part missing for that year, but that he believed the statement that they were married in May in 1837 to be perfectly bonâ fide, that Alexander Kennedy, who is eighty-two years of age, has sworn that Maria M'Aleese is about seventy-two years of age, and that other sworn testimonies support this claim; and, seeing that it is well known that the Census Returns in Ireland for 1841 have over and over again proved to be unreliable, whether, under all the circumstances, he will direct that this claim be admitted?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI have given careful consideration to this case, but have no power to review the decision of the pension authorities or to direct them to allow the claim to a pension.
§ Mr. BOLANDasked on what grounds Daniel Healy, Castlequin, Cahirciveen, has not been allowed the full amount of old age pension passed by the local subcommittee, in view of the evidence submitted by the claimant concerning a remittance received from America in 1907 and the handing over of his farm to his daughter in consequence of his inability to work it as he has attained the age of seventy-seven?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe pension sub-committee allowed Daniel Healy a pension of 5s., the pension officer having recommended 1s., but the Local Government Board on appeal decided in January, 1909, that the claimant was only entitled to a pension of 1s. In February, 1909, the pensioner assigned his holding to his daughter by deed, and in March raised a question 155W that he was entitled to the full pension of 5s. This amount was allowed by the committee, but the question was disallowed by the Local Government Board on appeal, having regard to the terms of Section 4 (3) of the Old Age Pensions Act. Healy subsequently raised a second question that he was entitled to the full pension, but the Board again determined in May last that he was not entitled to a pension at a higher rate than 1s. a week.
§ Mr. JAMES O'KELLYasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on 11th January, 1909, a claim to an old age pension from Mrs. Katherine Tobin, of Cleen, Knockvicar, county Roscommon, was submitted for the consideration of the Boyle (No. 1) pension sub-committee, and that the pension officer in the prescribed form reported that the claimant, Mrs. Tobin, attended the meeting of the subcommittee and produced evidence that satisfied the sub-committee that she was seventy years and upwards, and therefore entitled to a pension of 5s. per week, all the other conditions being fulfilled; that on 24th September, 1909, the second claim from Mrs. Tobin came before the committee, and was accompanied by a return from the 1841 Census, showing Mrs. Tobin to be seventy-two years of age, and therefore showing her to have been over seventy-one years when the committee allowed her claim; will he say whether the sub-committee was entitled to grant the pension on evidence other than a return of the Census, and whether having done so invalidates the grant of the pension; and, if not, why the Local Government Board persists in witholding the pension first granted on the first claim made, seeing that Mr. Hanley, supervisor of Inland Revenue, admits that injustice has been done in witholding this poor woman's pension, and that Mrs. Tobin was fully entitled to the pension when the claim was first made?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe facts regarding Mrs. Tobin's two claims are correctly stated, so far as the Local Government Board are aware. It rests with the pension subcommittee to decide what evidence of age they consider sufficient, and when Mrs. Tobin's first claim came before them they concluded, from her appearance and from her own statements, that she had reached the age of seventy years. The pension officer, however, appealed against this decision. When the case came before the Local Government Board on appeal the156W claimant did not produce any satisfactory evidence of age, nor did she furnish the necessary particulars to enable her to be traced in the Census Returns. In these circumstances the Board were obliged to disallow her claim. Mrs. Tobin, therefore, did not receive a pension in pursuance of her first claim, because she failed to prove that she complied with the statutory condition as to age.
§ Mr. JAMES O'KELLYasked the Chief Secretary whether he will have the case of Bridget M'Neeve, of Camogue, county Roscommon, reconsidered with a view to having her pension, granted by the subcommittee, restored, seeing that the subcommittee, in granting the pension, had before them evidence of age other than the Census Returns, and the Local Government Board, in withdrawing the pension, had no proof that Bridget M'Neeve had not attained the statutory term of seventy years?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Local Government Board have no power to reconsider their decisions. The facts are as follows: The Pension sub-committee allowed a pension of 5s. to Mrs. M'Neeve. The pension officer appealed, and the Board disallowed the claim, inasmuch as the claimant could not furnish any satisfactory evidence that she had attained the statutory age. When an appeal is made to the Board on the ground of age it rests upon the claimant or pensioner to show that the statutory condition as to age is fulfilled.