§ Mr. P. WHITE
asked the Pensions Minister why, notwithstanding the letter of 13th June, 1918, over the name of Matthew Nathan, intimating that a gratuity of £50 has been awarded to Thomas Farrell, Drogheda, No. 111361, late Royal Engineers, the amount has not yet been forwarded to him; and whether he is aware that Thomas Farrell has been since asked to accept a smaller amount?
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWEN
Mr. Thomas Farrell was informed on 13th 183W June, 1918, that he had been awarded a gratuity of £50 under Article 7 (2) of the Royal Warrant of 1917 in lieu of his previous award of 4s. 8d. for eighteen months. As he had already received £18 5s. 4d. in respect of the latter award the sum due was £31 14s. 8d. The necessary authority for payment of this amount was issued on the 28th June.
§ Mr. PENNEFATHER
asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the ration allowance issued to a married soldier sent on furlough pending discharge is to be raised in amount and issued for an extended period; and, if so, what the amount and the period will be?
§ Mr. FORSTER
It is not proposed to extend the period during which ration allowance is issued to married men sent on furlough pending discharge. The rate of allowance is still under consideration.
§ Sir W. DICKINSON
asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he has considered the scale of family allowance paid to men in the Army who live at home; whether he is aware that in the case of a man with a wife and two children in London (his own pay being 11s. 1d. a week) he would receive whilst employed away from home 39s. 1d., being 28s. separation allowance and 11s. 1d. Army pay, together with board and lodging, whereas when employed in London and living at home he would be paid 46s. 1d., or an addition of 7s. a week; whether the sum of 7s. is deemed sufficient to cover the cost of the man's board and lodging at home and his fares to and from his work; and, if not, whether he will reconsider the scale under which such allowances are made?
§ Mr. FORSTER
I would refer my right hon. Friend to the answer which I gave yesterday to a similar question by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Dulwich.