Jump to content
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Pension information !


elinga
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello all , I have had a lot of help over the years regarding my great uncle and other relatives who were killed during WW!

today I have a question regarding Private Robert Arnott Millar Royal Scots Fusiliers 2000973.

I have recently came accross the pension document below , my question is  , was the pension refused or was it a referal ?

neither of which I understand !

any help would be greatly appreciated !

regards Elinga

Millar, Thomas (200973).jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Fuller context commonly helps in these situations

839882281_MILLART200973.png.a479a7aac322906ec5bef0a6034e0796.png

Image courtesy of Ancestry

A Dependant's Pension under Article 21 of the Royal Warrant required some dependency - typically shown by some prior payments or deductions from pay etc. - however it seems that this was not always necessary and parents of single men, especially mothers initially, frequently got small pensions - typically c.5/- pw [hard to be definitive since the vast majority of the main pension files were deliberately destroyed after their use was ended]

To me, it seems clear that his mother made an initial claim as D.P. 274 [similar details are on another card - headed by her name etc. to allow for two-way indexing] and appears above to initially have been refused [Refusal] but from other annotations in the 1920s & 1930s on the card it seems one was eventually paid and it appears his father later got it too [typically instead of a mother/his wife who commonly had subsequently died] - There continue to be annotations using a later Ministry of Pension claim reference of 1/D/40368 to 2.12.38.  [Sadly for the reason given above we cannot see the full file and details.]

:-) M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

first of all , yes Tootrock I accidentally gave him an extra zero , I will amend it !

museum tom , yes that is my great uncle Thomas , but he never lived in Ayr !

oldsweets , I really cropped the card in the first place to try and find out what the word was , I could have posted the whole thing :-( 

I can also confirm,  which may change the outcome , Thomas's  father died on 26th November 1938, would that have any connection to the addition of the 2.12.1938 date written on the card ?

thanx for the assistance I appreciate it .

regards

ps just to clarify things I have tried to edit his name and number , but it wont allow me ,  must have been tired when I posted the original !

his name is Thomas Arnott Millar and his service number is 200973 

Edited by elinga
made a mistake !
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
14 minutes ago, elinga said:

Roberts father died on 26th November 1938, would that have any connection to the addition of the 2.12.1938 date written on the card ?

Possibly. Somebody certainly looked at the card and made an annotation shortly afterwards.

Craig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could she have made an additional claim, on the death of her husband John in 1938, after losing his income and that was the refusal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
7 minutes ago, Peterhastie said:

Could she have made an additional claim, on the death of her husband John in 1938, after losing his income and that was the refusal?


A claim may have been possible but almost always the granting or refusal written on the card is the original case - with all the other notes being scribbled on afterwards.

Craig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ss002d6252 said:


A claim may have been possible but almost always the granting or refusal written on the card is the original case - with all the other notes being scribbled on afterwards.

Craig

I was thinking along those lines Craig , but as oldsweets said , "hard to be definitive since the vast majority of the main pension files were deliberately destroyed after their use was ended" dont suppose we will ever know :-(

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are three other cards, or sides of cards for him

1.

2.

3.

Not sure how this affects an interpretation, but I thought I’d post them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/08/2021 at 11:48, elinga said:

I can also confirm,  which may change the outcome , Thomas's  father died on 26th November 1938, would that have any connection to the addition of the 2.12.1938 date written on the card ?

Yes, I think it probably does in terms of the later dates, but as Craig has also pointed out above - probably not the initial reaction to his mother's first claim attempt.

On 17/08/2021 at 22:08, Peterhastie said:

There are three other cards, or sides of cards for him

1.

2.

3.

Not sure how this affects an interpretation, but I thought I’d post them.

Thanks Peter for these - Handy of you to post - I've now had a further look at the fronts and reverses of these three new cards [Note: the strike-throughs below are off the cards]

Card 1 = A card in the name of Mrs Jane MILLAR, D.P. 274 = I believe this was the equal first card [intended to cross-reference with original claim D.P. 274, 1/D/40368, SE.02681 card posted in full above - The original first equal has three sequential claim/office references including first and also eventually the latest one from 1938]

Card 2 = A card correcting Mrs Jane MILLAR to Mrs Jeanie Lewis MILLAR - annotated 18.1.39 like the original card posted in full above - Has an annotation John Deceased in red, i.e. different, ink at the top [the reverse has the 26 Greenwood Rows address] with the reference of D.P. 274 1/D/40368 = I believe this card is the most recent [by this date the notes appear to have primarily gone onto files and not so much also onto index cards, so we see little/less of this later period from the cards]

Card 3 = A card in the name of Mr John MILLAR and also cross-referenced with original claim card posted in full above DP/274/M, 1/D/40368  = potentially an intermediate close second to his mother's/wife's claim [This card is a bit of a further puzzle]

Looking at the original card above for his mother it does look as though there has been some confusion/correction at the pension offices over Mrs John / Mr John MILLAR and his mother's forenames - see also the original card - efforts have been made to correct this but confusion has ensured [well I seem to have initially fallen for it!]

To me, what does not seem to be in doubt is that the matter of dealing with a pension claim was active into the 1930s rather than necessarily a refusal then.

On 17/08/2021 at 23:32, elinga said:

damn Oldsweets , I dont have Fold 3 :-(

Apologies - I probably should have looked for those extra cards for myself earlier.

I now think my first posting might have been a bit off the mark - I now think the original card related primarily to his mother, but with later passing references to his father, John.

I stand by my original interpretation of "Refusal" rather than "Referral" though - and I think that was her original, not a later, claim first outcome.

As before - I think the big problem is a lack of a full pension claim(s) / award(s) file.  Hey ho!  :-/

:-) M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Matlock.

There'a distinct similarity in the handwriting between the card you posted and the No.1 card that I posted.

I can't see that the "Refusal" comment on the card you posted matches any other handwriting/pen on the other cards.

Not that it probably means anything?

 

Edited by Peterhastie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...