Pink Dependents Card - Deciphering Codes and Labels

[SJones]

Dear all,

 

I have been researching my great grandfather who was in the 1st Battalion South Staffs. and was killed in WW1 at The Battle of Loos in 1915. I have obtained a number of documents relating to him, including a Medals Awarded Certificate, Widow's Pension Record and a pink 'Dependent's Card'.

 

Whilst I have grasped what much of the information that is detailed relates to, there are a couple of abbreviations and references that I am unable to decipher on the pink form and wondered if anyone on this forum can assist? They are:

 

- 'W.C.I. 2215 - in a square black box'

- 'P.R. 689'

- 'Rgn. 6.24.2.23'

 

These references appear to have been 'scribbled on' and added at a later date. The back page also makes reference to a 'form 37a' and 'Gas' which I am also unsure about.

 

Finally there is reference to a 'Noted for Novel' which I understand regular appears on these cards although I am unsure of the meaning?

 

Any assistance would be appreciated.

 

Thank you.

JH Snr. - Death Pension Record.pdf JH Snr. Death Pension Back Page.pdf

Edited 4 June , 2020 by SJones
Link request

[ss002d6252]

Quote

'Rgn. 6.24.2.23'

Region 6 - 24 Feb 1923 - the date it was sent to the region. This article from the WFA has a map of the regions that I located for them againsy which David listed the counties - https://www.westernfrontassociation.com/world-war-i-articles/index-of-counties-within-regions-for-pension-records/

 

Quote

'P.R. 689'

It's an admin code - probably Pension Issue Office.

 

Quote

'W.C.I. 2215

Also an admin code - probably Pension Issue Office.

 

Quote

Finally there is reference to a 'Noted for Novel' which I understand regular appears on these cards although I am unsure of the meaning?

No-one knows - myself and others have spent many hours trying to figure it out.

 

Can you post a link to the pension record ?

 

Craig

[SJones]

44 minutes ago, ss002d6252 said:

Region 6 - 24 Feb 1923 - the date it was sent to the region. This article from the WFA has a map of the regions that I located for them againsy which David listed the counties - https://www.westernfrontassociation.com/world-war-i-articles/index-of-counties-within-regions-for-pension-records/

 

It's an admin code - probably Pension Issue Office.

 

Also an admin code - probably Pension Issue Office.

 

No-one knows - myself and others have spent many hours trying to figure it out.

 

Can you post a link to the pension record ?

 

Craig

Thanks Craig,

Posted the files.

[ss002d6252]

Quote

'form 37a' and 'Gas'

It's 'Gen form 37a to C2 Cas(ualty branch)'

Some info on C2 can be read here - https://warrecordsrevealed.com/graves-registration-commission-directorate-of-graves-registration-enquiries-i-w-g-c-record-glossary/#unique-identifier8

 

Craig

[SJones]

Great, thank you for clearing that up for me.

 

 

[Matlock1418]

On 04/06/2020 at 17:58, SJones said:

'Noted for Novel'

 

On 04/06/2020 at 18:08, ss002d6252 said:

No-one knows - myself and others have spent many hours trying to figure it out.

Craig is not wrong! but I think the general conclusion previously arrived at was that "Noted for Novel' = "Noted for Unusual" / "Noted for Special" treatment - which would not be unsurprising given that there were 5 children under 16yo - this would result in a reducing pension element for each of them if they died or eventually reached 16yo [16yo being the normal end of entitlement for a child's pension - see also below]

 

I am slightly surprised you did not also question [MB DEAD 27.9.33] on the PC - my personal opinion is that it indicates that the pension claim is 'dead'/ended / has been initialled & dated as audited and confirmed as such at 27.9.33 - all the children would seem might have reached 16yo [and there is no evidence of any special needs extension for any of them, but possibly for up to 5 years in the case of disability and the like if so eligible].  The interpretation would be that the widow had possibly remarried [and lost the entitlement to a pension {which actually had been done before} - but no evidence/explanation presented on the PC] or had died sometime before that date.  All in all the claim seems confirmed 'Dead' in 1933, but not necessarily any person [see also below]

 

It is to be recognised that there is also a Pension Ledger on which it is noted 1921/23 that the Widow's pension was forfeited / suspended [this is not really further explained might have been she remarried or became an 'unworthy wife' or the like {I don't exactly know what this stinging term exactly describes but could make a bit of a guess - obviously on the wrong side of the authorities it would seem} - but this is not indicated on the ledger] though it does indicate the children's allowance was to be administered in trust - again this would seem to make the claim a candidate for 'Noted for Novel' treatment

Image courtesy of the Western Front Association / Fold 3 with thanks.

In addition to Region 6 [which Craig has already identified - West Midlands] on both PC & PL you can see that there is a claim reference(s) for Region 11 too [Region 11 being London & SE] so somebody's movement away from West Bromwich seems to have occurred [probably by the widow as the children's trust seems likely to have to stayed at West Bromwich - may interest you and might be the cause of widow losing her pension / children's trust existence as at around the same time]

Good luck ...

:-) M

Edited 19 June , 2020 by Matlock1418
clarification

[SJones]

Hi there, 

 

Thank you for your comments above. Appreciate the clarification regarding the 'Noted for Novel'. With regards to the 'DEAD' stamp I had assumed this simply related to my great grandfather being KIA rather than referring to the pension so that is useful information. I don't think it relates to my great grandmother's death as this wasn't until the 1950's. 

 

Yes I have copies of the ledger also. Three of the children were adopted following notification of death (to Watford hence the London code) and I therefore believe that this is the reason for the forfeiting of the pension to my great grandmother. 

 

Many thanks,

 

Scott

[ss002d6252]

19 minutes ago, SJones said:

Hi there, 

 

Thank you for your comments above. Appreciate the clarification regarding the 'Noted for Novel'. With regards to the 'DEAD' stamp I had assumed this simply related to my great grandfather being KIA rather than referring to the pension so that is useful information. I don't think it relates to my great grandmother's death as this wasn't until the 1950's. 

 

Yes I have copies of the ledger also. Three of the children were adopted following notification of death (to Watford hence the London code) and I therefore believe that this is the reason for the forfeiting of the pension to my great grandmother. 

 

Many thanks,

 

Scott

It is not known for certain what DEAD refers to but the fact that it almost always seems to correlate with the children reaching 16 suggests that it does mean that the claim itself (or part of it) was DEAD ( 'Dead' was sometimes used in my days in the civil service in respect of a 'dead claim' rather than a 'dead person').

Craig

[Matlock1418]

1 hour ago, SJones said:

Three of the children were adopted following notification of death (to Watford hence the London code) and I therefore believe that this is the reason for the forfeiting of the pension to my great grandmother.

From the Ledger it appears to be the Widow's pension that was forfeit, not the children's allowance - if it was just adoption then I think she would might have kept her pension [for herself] whilst the children's allowance was in trust.

Craig may know more and be able to explain better than I speculate

More of a mystery for you to look into though  ;-)

Good luck ...

:-) M

[ss002d6252]

The claim paid in 1916 was an article 11 & 12 pension - widows, and child allowances to widows

 

On 30 March 1921 the Special Grants Committee confirmed that the widow's pension was forfeited and that the children's allowances were to be administered in trust by the CAO (Chief Area Officer), West Bromwich office.

 

On 10 March 1923 some correspondence was revoiced by the Special Grants Committee, who confirmed it did not affect the decision.

 

On 14 March 1923 the widow was informed the decision of suspension stood.

 

On 19 September 1923 the claim was transferred to the London Region (11).

 

Article 10, which covered the basic issue of pension for widows, allowed for forfeiture due to conduct. Forfeiture by conduct had to go to the Special Grants Committee to be approved. I suspect there was probably some sort of criminal or negligence issue involved.

 

Craig

[Terry_Reeves]

A widow could have her pensioned stopped for a number of reasons, principally:

 

Co-habitation,  that is with a man to whom she was not married.

 

Prostitution.

 

Habitual drunkeness.

 

Theft or other criminal offences.

 

Initially this included the removal of  any allowance for the woman's children. As time moved on, some regional pension committee complained about this aspect. In the case of  drunkenness where the mother was spending  most of  the pension on alcohol, it was suggested that the committee should take control of that part of the pension  and by food with it for the family.

 

TR

 

 

[ss002d6252]

Where the Chief Area Office (CAO) had been instructed it was to ensure that there was adequate supervision in place in respect of what the monies were being spent on.A visiting officer would be sent out to check if the situation had improved or whether the CAO still needed to administer the monies. I would imagine that the visiting officers also fed back information to the local social services departments of the day.

Craig

[Matlock1418]

One has to remember that at the time a Widow's Pension and Allowances were not a right, but were granted/awarded by Royal favour

 

As mentioned earlier: "Unworthy Wife" was pensions clerks' shorthand for unworthy conduct by a wife/widow [typical examples have now been more graphically given above]

 

From Hogge & Garside - War Pensions and Allowances 1919 [selected abstracts]:

(8) Unworthy Conduct. A widow's pension may be suspended or cancelled by the Army Council, if the widow should prove unworthy of the award.

 

WIDOWS AND DEPENDANTS
Pensions to the widows, children, and dependants of deceased soldiers, cannot be claimed as a right, and no pension is granted or continued to a widow or dependant who is unworthy of favour, and it is in the power of the Minister of Pensions to terminate or suspend any pension that may have been granted to such persons or to provide for its administration under such conditions as he may determine, and his decision in any case shall be final.

 

Withdrawal, Cessation and Suspension. The allowance will be discontinued to a dependant who is, owing to serious misconduct, unworthy to receive it.

 

You'll get the message - shame his widow didn't seem to get it [though if, or how often, it might have been pointed out to her is unknown] but she seems to somehow have really slipped up and run foul of this - must have been considered pretty serious misconduct one would assume [though not knowing the thresholds then applied]

At least the kids seem likely to have received something/some benefit due to allowances being administered in trust.

Whichever way seems likely to have been rather sad experience for them all. 

[unless any possible child neglect or abuse was terminated by such actions - and their subsequent adoption was better - I hope]

:-) M