taylorsearcher Posted 8 November , 2019 Share Posted 8 November , 2019 A review of the Pension Cards and Ledgers has confirmed a family story that the pension of my deceased great grandfather was being claimed by two women. One, by/for his true widow and two dependant children (under 16) and the other, by the woman - he had previously left his wife for - as the guardian to his illegitimate children ! My question is this:- Was the pension and/or children’s allowance a finite amount and therefore in this case his wife would have received a lesser amount than the ‘standard’ amount - the rest being issued to the second claimant ? Or, would each claim be assessed on its respective merits ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 8 November , 2019 Share Posted 8 November , 2019 Just because one was paid a certain amount wouldn't mean that the other was paid less. Each was individually assessed. Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bif Posted 8 November , 2019 Share Posted 8 November , 2019 (edited) Craig, Does that mean two diff pensions could be paid for the death of the same soldier to two diff beneficiaries ? Edited 8 November , 2019 by bif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylorsearcher Posted 10 November , 2019 Author Share Posted 10 November , 2019 In addition to bif's question above, below are the pension cards for each woman's claim. Can anyone suggest answers to the following:- Would the amount for Alice (his true widow) decrease when the remaining two children reached the age of 16 ? Would the (remaining) pension be paid to Alice up to the date of her death (which was in 1963) ? When did updates to these cards stop, as although there appears to be a subsequent address update, (she was at the Rosslyn Road address from 1909 until at least 1939) she moved addresses at least once more before she died ? The linked Ledger suggests that his mother as the claimant (although there appears not be a corresponding Card. What could this indicate ? The claim by Mrs ! Mary Baker only appears to relate to her guardianship of their illigitimate children (in general) rather than claiming for the children themselves. The awarded amount appears to have a limited duration (expiring 7.4.1920), but this date does not have any relation to the children's respective ages. (There were 4 chidren and they would be 16 in the years 1928, 1929, 1930 & 1933). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylorsearcher Posted 12 November , 2019 Author Share Posted 12 November , 2019 Craig, Can I assume that the fact that he was accidentally killed - he fell under a train in France on his way back from leave, rather than killed by a German - does not have a bearing on the pension amount? Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 13 November , 2019 Share Posted 13 November , 2019 On 12/11/2019 at 09:04, taylorsearcher said: Craig, Can I assume that the fact that he was accidentally killed - he fell under a train in France on his way back from leave, rather than killed by a German - does not have a bearing on the pension amount? Dave The fact that he was accidentally killed would not reduce the amount paid (This changed during the war - originally it had to be death due to or aggravated by service for a pension to be considered). On 08/11/2019 at 19:21, bif said: Craig, Does that mean two diff pensions could be paid for the death of the same soldier to two diff beneficiaries ? Yes, assuming that the person qualified then multiple pensions could be paid Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bif Posted 13 November , 2019 Share Posted 13 November , 2019 3 hours ago, ss002d6252 said: Yes, Craig, Thanks for the answer. That's amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylorsearcher Posted 14 November , 2019 Author Share Posted 14 November , 2019 Craig, thanks for the above, but do you have any thoughts on my questions relating to the detail on the cards . regards Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylorsearcher Posted 17 November , 2019 Author Share Posted 17 November , 2019 Further to (one) of the questions above. The second Mrs Baker - ‘the other woman’ formally married in 1919 and had another child in 1920, albeit born in May. Would this marriage have cancelled her previous claim for being the guardian of Alfred’s illegitimate children ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 21 December , 2019 Share Posted 21 December , 2019 Hi Craig. Just tumbled into this thread as I turned up a local casualty with a pension card to a lady who was not his wife, as "Guardian". Details below with thanks to Ancestry and WFA: What I am short of is information about how these claims were made and on what basis they were awarded. My guess is that there would have to be some firm information-perhaps a court ruling? - to verify, for Min.Pensions that the claim was true. Could you give me any "heads up" on this process? In this matter, Charles Andrews seems to have joined the army sharpish having impregnated a local girl in Wanstead- he seems to have run away from his pharmaceutical exams and joined a regiment away from either where he lived or where he came from. I have recently picked up a pre-war bastardy case for maintenance for another local casualty ,2Lt Herbert Golden Dix,MC, KIA 1917 (a singularly inappropriate name in the circumstances). Would the Min.Pensions uphold pre-war bastardy awards against men subsequently killed in the war if a claim was made? (Why do I think that the answer is going to be in that pensions handbook at Kew...............) Name: Charles Cyril Andrews Rank: Pte Record Type: Death Military Service Region: Eastern/London/South East, England Death Date: 30 Jun 1916 Service Number: 1948 Corps, Regiment or Unit: R. Sussex Title: PRC Ledgers Description: Pension Record Ledger Reference Number: 11/PP/21603, /D/3 Next of Kin: Name Relation to Soldier Charles Cyril Andrews Ellen Maria Gathergood Guardian of illegitimate child (Guardian) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 22 December , 2019 Share Posted 22 December , 2019 Quote My guess is that there would have to be some firm information-perhaps a court ruling? - to verify, for Min.Pensions that the claim was true. Could you give me any "heads up" on this process? A motherless child under a guardian would be awarded 'motherless allowance' in place separation allowance otherwise the guardian would get separation allowance. It would have been verified so they could readily port the claim across for a pension. I'd suspect that the forms were countersigned by a JP or a Priest - I'm not sure if it needed to go as far as to be brought in front of a bench to be certified but certainly it would have done so if a court order had been made for maintenance. Quote Would the Min.Pensions uphold pre-war bastardy awards against men subsequently killed in the war if a claim was made? I don't see why not, providing that evidence of the father was proffered. Bastard children were provided for in regulations. Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 23 December , 2019 Share Posted 23 December , 2019 Thanks Craig. From what you say, I would suspect a declaration in front of JP is the most likely way-though fraught with hazards compared to our modern age of DNA. Wghat worries me is that famous law case of Russell v Russell (from the Dukes of Bedford) in the 1920s, where the husband was suspected of being impotent -on the wife's say-so- and where the court held that the testimony of the wife could not be admitted to bastardize the issue. She had claimed that he was not the father of her child,although they were married. The situation-in reverse-would seem to be appropriate for the (numerous) wartine cases of children out of wedlock with servicemen-whatever the reaons. Looks dangerous to rely solely on the word of the mother-On the other hand,what else was there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 23 December , 2019 Share Posted 23 December , 2019 Thanks Craig. From what you say, I would suspect a declaration in front of JP is the most likely way-though fraught with hazards compared to our modern age of DNA. Wghat worries me is that famous law case of Russell v Russell (from the Dukes of Bedford) in the 1920s, where the husband was suspected of being impotent -on the wife's say-so- and where the court held that the testimony of the wife could not be admitted to bastardize the issue. She had claimed that he was not the father of her child,although they were married. The situation-in reverse-would seem to be appropriate for the (numerous) wartine cases of children out of wedlock with servicemen-whatever the reaons. Looks dangerous to rely solely on the word of the mother-On the other hand,what else was there? I'm sure my predecessors on the bench would have loved a he says/she says case, I know I do now. An awful lot of cases relied solely (and still do) on the underlying contempt and perjury to try and keep the evidence truthful. I'll take a look though my notes when I get a chance and see if there's anything. Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 27 December , 2019 Share Posted 27 December , 2019 On 23/12/2019 at 14:56, ss002d6252 said: I'm sure my predecessors on the bench would have loved a he says/she says case It is indeed reassuring to know that the English magistracy look forward to sitting in anticipation of a panto. On a serious note though, the standard of proof for pension or in court for maintenance must be quite rigorous. Or not? As it is, I cannot recall any official stats. of the numbers of illegitimate children born during the Great War. There are good estimates for WW2 but the Great War is a bit of a mystery. Just seen again "I was There" on a Junkovision channel- with the interviews of Katie Morter, the lady widowed before her baby was born. Compelling stuff no matter how many times it is viewed-and what a lovely lady she was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now