WAR PENSION CUTS.

Grey River Argus, 28 April 1932, Page 6

WAR PENSION CUTS.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —I hope you will allow me a space to express my views on the above cuts. My father is in his 74th year and was receiving a pension for a son killed in action on October Ist, 1916, at Flers, south-west of Baupaume. He was allowed £1 per week, but now the “Siamese Twins” (Messrs Forbes and Coates), have suddenly discovered they arc paying too much alimony for a dead soldier, hence they have given him the handsome reward of 16/6 per week. What an honour for the dead! New Zealanders are ordered each year to take a holiday out of respect for our gallant heroes, but why should those left behind by the brave dead have their meagre pensions lowered! Have our two clever rulers the right to cut pensions of this kind? They may have tho power to cut the pensions pf the living, hut a death pension should neither rise nor fall. A settled amount which has been paid this last 16 years, should still be adhered to. Cuts are alright in some cases, but let them tax the young, and leave the older persons in peace for what little time they are to be on this earth! What about those out on superannuation who draw thereby enough to maintain more than one family? Of course, the twins I would not dare to touch so large a , sum as such people draw. What are

we to expect if faith is not kept with the dead? It is not a very good lookout for the living. I intend sending a protest to Mr 11. E. Holland, M.P., for Buller, and to Mr Jerry Connolly. M.P. for Mid-Canterbury, whom I know to bo fair-minded men. Th* l motto of every British regiment is “Death before Dishonour.” Now it seems to be it should be reversed.—l am, etc., J. HUNT. Domain Road. Blackball. (Some excisions from the foregoing have been necessary.—Ed. Argus).