Help Decipher from Pension Card

[keithfazzani]

I'll take a look. Sadly Cory have no archives, at least none that anyone knows about. When things get easier I may try some London libraries, their Head Office was in Fenchurch Street I believe. Incidentally it wasn't the case of encouraging only OR's to join up. As you will see from the above article the MD's son James Gordon Hamilton Greig was involved and died of his wounds within weeks of arrival at Ypres, well near Plugstreet to be precise died from wounds and is buried Bailleul. 

[Matlock1418]

6 hours ago, ss002d6252 said:

The 4 parties for whom the Separation Allowance is paid is likely just a clerk putting the number of people on the claim (3 kids + mother) rather than mentioning 4 children - if the 4 children were included in the claim then they should have been noted on the card. It's a pity that the ledger does not survive to cross check but...

I am not contradicting such a possibility but there certainly was some other dodgy clerking on the card [that should not have occurred] and that earlier there seemed potential for more children caught my eye keenly.

As far as I can ascertain [from the 1939 Register] the eldest son, William was b.24.9.1899 and thus would have been less than 16 when his father left for the Army and a SA would have been likely paid for him I believe [normally until 16 I would think i.e. until only two/three weeks before his father's death.  An assumption on eligible age I admit - can you clarify?] and so an earlier behind the scenes record of 4 children's SA being inadvertently partly/initially carried over was not wholly out of the question in my mind.

And thus likely a potential for a 'complication' and the "Noted for Novel" treatment I would suspect.

Nothing like a bit of speculation to get the minds engaged here on GWF!

As you/we both admit, sadly nothing to fully enlighten us in this case.

However, certainly in having looked at many, many hundreds of pension cards, I have the strong impression, but sadly I've not the recorded the evidence, that the indicated number of SA usually/certainly very commonly match the number of children - and did not normally include the wife/mother/widow.

As always - Happy to be shown that was/was not the case.  Every day can be a school day!

 

7 hours ago, ss002d6252 said:

The 23s per week pension in July 1916 looks right for 3 kids - I don't have the full figures to hand but the April 1915 committee proposal was 20s 6d for a widow with 3 kids plus 2s 6d age allowance if she was between 35 and 45, which takes us to the 23s per week.

Knew you would probably turn up with the figures - I thought it seemed about right for M+3C = thanks for helping out. :-)

I really must try to get to grips with such matters. ,-/

 

Your guides on WFA certainly do help [many thanks] and yet, as Keith is probably rapidly learning, there is so much to absorb - and seemingly yet even more to learn as time goes on.

:-) M

[Matlock1418]

20 hours ago, Matlock1418 said:

there is an 8 year gap between their daughters  ... [on the Pension card]

Just for clarity regarding the potential numbers of children - looking at the 1911 Census there were five children recorded there in 1911 - with Charles eventually coming along later, in 1913.

Image courtesy of Ancestry - with thanks.

But, it may be observed that there were two other daughters in that 8 year period earlier referred to - Fany [?] who is recorded and struck through as 'dead' on the Census and Violet who seems to have not been recorded by the time the pension claim was made [I wonder?]

Tragedy/child mortality = so very sad, but that seemed to be case so often at the time.

A potential 'complication' I felt had to be explored - and might as well be recorded in this thread for Keith and/or any who follow.

:-) M

Edited 11 November , 2020 by Matlock1418

[keithfazzani]

Once again thanks for all the help. As I have only just started on the pension cards for the 207 men of whom over 50% were killed or discharged unfit I am on a steep learning curve and welcome all the help I can get. 

[ss002d6252]

8 minutes ago, keithfazzani said:

Once again thanks for all the help. As I have only just started on the pension cards for the 207 men of whom over 50% were killed or discharged unfit I am on a steep learning curve and welcome all the help I can get. 

I'm sure we can help as ever, the more we can actively investigate the more we can learn.

Craig

[Tony Ferguson]

Craig
I would like to take a look at your pieces on Pensions- where can I find them please?

Thanks

Tony

[Tony Ferguson]

On 11/11/2020 at 22:18, Matlock1418 said:

I am not contradicting such a possibility but there certainly was some other dodgy clerking on the card [that should not have occurred] and that earlier there seemed potential for more children caught my eye keenly.

As far as I can ascertain [from the 1939 Register] the eldest son, William was b.24.9.1899 and thus would have been less than 16 when his father left for the Army and a SA would have been likely paid for him I believe [normally until 16 I would think i.e. until only two/three weeks before his father's death.  An assumption on eligible age I admit - can you clarify?] and so an earlier behind the scenes record of 4 children's SA being inadvertently partly/initially carried over was not wholly out of the question in my mind.

And thus likely a potential for a 'complication' and the "Noted for Novel" treatment I would suspect.

Nothing like a bit of speculation to get the minds engaged here on GWF!

As you/we both admit, sadly nothing to fully enlighten us in this case.

However, certainly in having looked at many, many hundreds of pension cards, I have the strong impression, but sadly I've not the recorded the evidence, that the indicated number of SA usually/certainly very commonly match the number of children - and did not normally include the wife/mother/widow.

As always - Happy to be shown that was/was not the case.  Every day can be a school day!

 

Knew you would probably turn up with the figures - I thought it seemed about right for M+3C = thanks for helping out. :-)

I really must try to get to grips with such matters. ,-/

 

Your guides on WFA certainly do help [many thanks] and yet, as Keith is probably rapidly learning, there is so much to absorb - and seemingly yet even more to learn as time goes on.

:-) M

Please excuse my ignorance- what is "WFA"?
Thanks

[RussT]

10 minutes ago, Tony Ferguson said:

Please excuse my ignorance- what is "WFA"?

 

Western Front Association

 

Home | The Western Front Association

 

Regards

 

Russ

[Tony Ferguson]

Thanks Russ. I joined the WFA last night. Looks a good site!

[ss002d6252]

1 minute ago, Tony Ferguson said:

Thanks Russ. I joined the WFA last night. Looks a good site!

 

Just seen your earlier post - my articles are mixed in amongst the ones on the WFA site alongside those done by David Tattersfield (of which I have also contributed to a few).

 

Any questions, though feel free to ask.

Craig

[Matlock1418]

19 hours ago, Tony Ferguson said:

Please excuse my ignorance- what is "WFA"?

Sorry I didn't explain - Russ has done a good job, and clearly to good effect!

Glad you have joined. :-)

 

20 minutes ago, ss002d6252 said:

my articles are mixed in amongst the ones on the WFA site alongside those done by David Tattersfield (of which I have also contributed to a few).

 

Any questions, though feel free to ask.

As I often do ask! :-)

Craig [and David?] - When's your book out? ;-)

If not imminently due; then you'd better get writing ;-) ;-)

Sure to be a best-seller at WFA and here on GWF. ;-) ;-) ;-)

:-) M

[ss002d6252]

Without going too off topic - the war pensions and the war gratuity are two things I have considered writing and self publishing a book on (I actually have a partial manuscript of a war gratuity one).

Craig

[Tony Ferguson]

On 26/01/2021 at 16:05, ss002d6252 said:

 

Just seen your earlier post - my articles are mixed in amongst the ones on the WFA site alongside those done by David Tattersfield (of which I have also contributed to a few).

 

Any questions, though feel free to ask.

Craig

Many thanks Craig!

Appreciated

[Tony Ferguson]

Any help in deciphering the attached pension card would really assist!

Cheers

[ss002d6252]

It has to be remembered that the ledgers thermselves were only in any real use for a few years from 1920/21, after that they were sometimes updated and sometimes not.

 

Most of the text on the front page is administrative codes for work undertaken by the clerks - taking the file out of storage, putting it back, dealiing with correspondence and apparently moving the claim between regions (Ulster to Scotland - and then probably back to Ulster again). Entries were often rubbed out and overwritten again if space was lacking.

 

The rear of the ledger shows the first entry as Oct1921. This would (in most cases) be the entry added the first time that that ledger needed to be updated after the cases were sent out to the regional offices. They seem to have operated on a 'don't complete the details until we need to' type of system. It does tell us that from Dec 1921 onwards he seemed to be improving as his award level was reduced on the basis that his level of disability was decreasing.

 

Craig

[Tony Ferguson]

On 28/01/2021 at 07:18, ss002d6252 said:

It has to be remembered that the ledgers thermselves were only in any real use for a few years from 1920/21, after that they were sometimes updated and sometimes not.

 

Most of the text on the front page is administrative codes for work undertaken by the clerks - taking the file out of storage, putting it back, dealiing with correspondence and apparently moving the claim between regions (Ulster to Scotland - and then probably back to Ulster again). Entries were often rubbed out and overwritten again if space was lacking.

 

The rear of the ledger shows the first entry as Oct1921. This would (in most cases) be the entry added the first time that that ledger needed to be updated after the cases were sent out to the regional offices. They seem to have operated on a 'don't complete the details until we need to' type of system. It does tell us that from Dec 1921 onwards he seemed to be improving as his award level was reduced on the basis that his level of disability was decreasing.

 

Craig

Craig

How long did these pensions remain in force? Were they lifetime awards? I notice the most "recent" date on the card was Nov 1930

 

[ss002d6252]

7 minutes ago, Tony Ferguson said:

Craig

How long did these pensions remain in force? Were they lifetime awards? I notice the most "recent" date on the card was Nov 1930

 

They could be lifetime awards but what we have to remember is that by the time you got past the early 1920's very little updating of the cards was done so we don't know exactly what was happening with a lot of pensions.

Craig

[Tony Ferguson]

3 minutes ago, ss002d6252 said:

They could be lifetime awards but what we have to remember is that by the time you got past the early 1920's very little updating of the cards was done so we don't know exactly what was happening with a lot of pensions.

Craig

Was it possible to have two pensions? And re your earlier post- what was the difference between a war pension and a war gratuity?

[Tony Ferguson]

23 hours ago, Tony Ferguson said:

Was it possible to have two pensions? And re your earlier post- what was the difference between a war pension and a war gratuity?

Got it- gratuities were paid to families of soldiers who had been killed