§ Mr. SHEEHANasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the clerks of pension sub-committees in county Cork have received no payments for their services since last September; can he explain the reason for this delay; and when he expects that the payments will be made?
§ Mr. MASTERMANI am informed by the Board of Customs and Excise that the accounts of the Cork County Pension Committee and Sub-Committees for the quarters subsequent to 30th September, 1911, have not yet been received.
Captain MURRAYasked the Secretary for Scotland the number of persons in Scotland who were in receipt of old age pensions on 1st January, 1909, 1st January, 1910, 1st January, 1911, and 1st January, 1912?
§ Mr. MASTERMANThere are no records to show the number of old age pensioners on the 1st January in any year except 1909, but the following figures represent the number of persons who were in receipt of old age pensions in Scotland on 1st January, 1909, and on the Fridays 3185W immediately preceding the 1st January, for the years 1910. 1911, and 1912:—
On 1st January, 1909 64,770 On Friday immediately preceding 1st January, 1910 76,037 On Friday immediately preceding 1st January, 1911 80,502 On Friday immediately preceding 1st January, 1912 94,243
§ Mr. SHEEHANasked the Chief Secretary whether he will explain the grounds upon which the Local Government Board have allowed the appeal of the pension officer against the grant of a pension to Cornelius Sheehan, of Inchamore, Coolea; whether this pension was unanimously recommended by the Macroom (No. 2) Pension Sub-Committee; was he granted this pension in 1909 by the then pension officer; has Sheehan's circumstances changed in any degree since 1909, and, if not, why is he now refused a pension; is he aware that in 1909 the pension officer was fully acquainted with the fact that Sheehan had assigned his farm to his son some years before; that this assignment was made before the Old Age Pensions Act was passed; and that therefore it could be in no sense an assignment made with the object of qualifying for a pension; and, seeing that Sheehan's position is the same now as in 1009, will he recommend that the Local Government Board reconsider their decision or, in the alternative, consider a new claim from this man?
§ Mr. BIRRELLA question raised as to Sheehan's pension by the pension officer was allowed by the Local Government Board on the grounds that his means exceeded the statutory limit as the Board were not satisfied that his maintenance on such a large and well-stocked farm was worth less than £31 10s. a year. A pension was awarded to Sheehan in 1909 as stated, and it is not alleged that his circumstances have altered since that date, but that his means exceeded the statutory limit.