§ Mr. O'SULLIVANasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that the local pension committee allowed a pension of 5s. per week to James Daly, of Knockanes, Headford, and that on appeal to the Local Government Board they decided he was not entitled to any pension; on what evidence was this decision arrived at; and whether, seeing that the rent of applicant's farm is £1 19s., and its Poor Law valuation only £2 5s., he will explain how they come to the decision that on the score of means he is disentitled?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe reply to the first paragraph of the question is in the affirmative. Two claims have been made by this man, and the Local Government Board carefully considered all the evidence submitted to them. Two farms are held in his name with identical rent and valuation, one of which the claimant alleged belonged to his son, who is of the same name, but no statutory evidence was produced in proof of the claimant's allegation.
§ Mr. O'SULLIVANasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that the local pension committee allowed John I. Sullivan, of Barraduff, Headford, county Kerry, a pension of 5s. on the 3rd April, 1912, which the Local Government Board, on appeal, decided he was not entitled to; and whether, seeing that the man is old and unable to work the farm and transferred it to his nephew in payment for the labour he gave him during the past twelve years or more, he will say on what grounds 695W the Local Government Board holds that he is not entitled to a pension?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe reply to the first paragraph of the question is in the affirmative. Having regard to the stock and crops on his holding, and to the circumstances under which the assignment was made, the Local Government Board were not satisfied that the claimant's means did not exceed the statutory limit.
§ Mr. O'SULLIVANasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that Denis Coakley, Rathmore, county Kerry, was allowed an old age pension of 5s. per week from May, 1909, to February, 1912, but that on the appeal of the pension officer the Local Government Board decided that Coakley's means were over £31 10s.; is he aware that the Board came to this decision without hearing any evidence from Coakley, and that more than three years ago Coakley assigned his farm to his son, receiving only £10 per year with a small quantity of potatoes, turf, and milk, together with a room in the house; will he say on what grounds the Local Government Board values these at more than £31 10s. per annum; and whether, seeing the treatment this man has received, his case will be reopened and more fully investigated?
§ Mr. BIRRELLIn this case the Local Government Board, before giving their decision, had before them statements made by the solicitor employed by Coakley, and, as the solicitor has already been informed, the Board disallowed the pension on the ground that, having regard to the stock and crops on the farm assigned the benefits reserved in the agreements could not be regarded as adequately representing Coakley's means.