I made representations on behalf of James Scally, No. 809771, 2 Harbour Cottages, Mullingar, who was in the Army and who was in the Congo in 1961. This young chap was 22 or 23 years of age, as fine a specimen of a man as you could see in Ireland. He was engaged to be married. He was to go off sentry duty at 6 o'clock in the evening—I am not too sure of the exact time—but the other battalion had not turned up and he was asked to remain for another hour. He remained on and was shot during that time. From 1961 to 1967 he has been in and out of hospital and had four operations. He was discharged from the Army in March, 1967. He is receiving only about £5 per week, and he got no compensation despite the fact that as an active young man he is ruined for life. He has lost the use of his left arm and is 90 per cent disabled. Our Army has refused to give him any gratuity although he is so disabled and is the sole support of his mother and a young sister.
The Department wrote to me on 4th October, 1967 and said:
A Chara,
With further reference to your representations on behalf of ex-Private J. Scally, 2 Harbour Cottages, Mullingar, who was wounded in the Congo in December, 1961, and was discharged from the Defence Forces in March, 1967, I am desired by an tAire Cosanta to say that Mr. Scally is in receipt of a temporary award of wound pension under the Army Pensions Acts at the rate of £4.11.6d. per week based on a degree of disablement assessed by the Army Pensions Board at 70%, at his medical examination in May, 1967. This is the maximum award payable in Mr. Scally's case having regard to the terms of the Acts and the degree of his disablement as assessed by the Board...
I am to add that it is regretted that Mr. Scally is not eligible for the payment of an ex gratia lump sum as his discharge from the Forces took place more than four years after the date he received his wound.
In this matter the Minister is relying on the fact that the claim was not made within four years, but the reason he could not make the claim was that he was in hospital during this time. However, he disputes that and has given me a copy of a letter which he sent and which was headed as follows: "809771 Pte. Scally, James, No. 2 Hospital Coy., St. Bricin's Hospital, Dublin, 7." It is dated 25th October, 1965, and was sent to the "Injuries and Claims Dept., UNO, through O/C., St. Bricin's Hospital". He went on to say:
Sir,
I respectfully submit my claim for compensation for injury received on the 18th Dec., 1961, while serving with the UNO Troops in the Congo.
He goes on to relate the history of his case. I again communicated with the Department in November, 1967, and pointed out that on the 25th October, 1965, Private Scally wrote to the Injuries and Claims Department through his O/C in St. Bricin's Hospital claiming compensation for injuries received on 18th December, 1961, while serving with the UNO troops in the Congo. I gave the injury as GSW in the chest, which are Army terms. I also pointed out that he got a reply to that letter stating that he could not get compensation while still serving but to renew his claim when he had been discharged. I further stated in the letter that he did this when he was discharged on 23rd March, 1967. I pointed out I thought he had been most unfairly and unjustly treated
Here is a man who writes to the Minister's Department before the four years are up and gets a reply stating he cannot claim until the four years have expired. Then when the four years have expired, the Department write and inform him that he is not entitled to a gratuity or a lump sum because his claim has not arrived until four years after he has left the Forces.
I received a further letter from you on 27th of November, 1967, in which you stated:
With reference to your further representations on behalf of ex-Private James Scally, 2 Harbour Cottages, Mullingar, who is in receipt of a wound pension under the Army Pensions Acts, I am desired by an tAire Cosanta to say that Mr. Scally's case has been reviewed and he has been awarded a final pension at the increased rate of £5 16s 6d per week with effect from 13th October, 1967. This is the maximum award payable to him having regard to the terms of the Acts and the degree of his disablement, viz. 90 per cent, as assessed by the Army Pensions Board at his recent medical examination.
Here you have, on your own assessment, agreed that a man in his prime of life is 90 per cent disabled. He is a member of our Army who volunteered for and went to the Congo and was wounded in the Congo and because of some technical point he is refused any lump sum. The man as I pointed out, is engaged to be married but he cannot get married, nor can he enjoy life like any other young man because he is 90 per cent disabled. It is a disgrace and I should like the Minister to look into this case. I am prepared to let him have the correspondence which I have. The only thing I can do now, and which I do not want to do, is to take the matter up with the United Nations, but, as I say, I do not want to do that if I can get any redress here.
