Renewed Protests At Ending Of Nelson’s Pension

Press, Volume XCIII, Issue 27892, 14 February 1956, Page 6

Renewed Protests At Ending Of Nelson’s Pension

(Special Correspondent N.Z.P.A.)

(Rec. 9 p.m.) LONDON, February 12. Both Conservative and Labour members of Parliament renewed their protests in the House of Commons at question time against the Nelson Estates Act passed by the 1947 Labour Government which ended the £5OOO a year pension granted in 1806 to the heirs of the victor of Trafalgar in perpetuity. They urged that legislation should be enacted to revoke or amend the act which legalised the abolition of the pension.

The present Earl has circularised members of Parliament and the press as part of a campaign either to get the pension restored or to obtain a lump settlement from the Government, as was granted the descendants ’ of Wellington, Marlborough and Rodney when their “perpetuity” pensions were ended by Government action. Nelson’s heirs have received more than £700.000 since the Battle of Trafalgar, and Wellington’s heirs were paid a lump sum of £210,000 when the Duke’s £lO,OOO annual pension was cancelled 70 years ago. The descendants of Marlborough received £3OOO a year until the Government settled with them for £63,000 to end the pension. The third Earl Nelson refused £105,000 from the Government to close his annual pension. In answer to a question, the Finan-

rial Secretary to the Treasury. Mr Henry Brooke, said that the Government was “now studying” a memorandum which the present Lord Nelson had submitted, asking for either a settlement payment or the restoration of the pension. Lieutenant-Colonel Bromley-Daven-port (Conservative): “While no-one expects a pension of this nature to go on for ever, was not this act described at the time by Sir Winston Churchill as stealing £5OOO annually from Lord Nelson? Cannot we now remedy this injustice by paying a lump sum?” Mr Anthony Kershaw (Conservative) said that there were many people who thought that if the State entered into a contract with someone, it should be kept, or proper compensation paid. Mr Chuter Ede (Labour) asked if the Government “will take into account the fact that the nation failed to meet the request of Lord Nelson that his lineal descendants should be looked after.” This was a reference to the fact that the holders of the Nelson title descend from Nelson’s brother and not the Admiral himself, while his dying reouest at Trafalgar that England should look after Lady Hamilton and their daughter was ignored. Mr Brooke said he could say nothing further until the Chancellor had fully examined the menforandum.