Mr. T. THOMSONasked the Pensions Minister whether he will reconsider the refusal of a pension to the widow and six children of Private Charles Raywood, No. 3/8974, 9th Yorkshire Regiment, who, after serving in the Army from 7th September, 1914, to 30th July, 1917, died in Northampton General Hospital on 8th July, 1918, from pneumonia owing to his debilitated physical condition due to Army service; whether he is aware that, as the widow is unable to earn a living, the seven dependants of this soldier will be driven into the workhouse by the refusal of a pension; and whether he is aware that if this soldier had been discharged from the Army in 1917, instead of being transferred to Class W Reserve, he would have been entitled to a pension on account of medical unfitness, and in that case his widow would have received the pension which she is now denied?
§ Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANSThis case has been very fully and carefully considered. I regret that it is not possible to reverse the decision that the death was638W not connected with the service. The death took place from pneumonia nearly a year after the soldier was transferred to the Reserve. With regard to the last part of the question, I may remind the hon. Member that even if Private Raywood had been discharged and pensioned it would still not have been possible to connect the illness from which he died with his Army service, and pension to the widow under Article 11 would have had to be refused.