Maltreatment of Prisoners of War

The claimant was a Private in the 15th Battalion - Regimental number 27174. He enlisted in August, 1914, at the age of 21. He is married and has four children. He was taken prisoner at Ypres, April 24, 1915, unwounded. He was repatriated to England December 3, 1918. Prior to enlistment, he was a locomotive wiper on the C.P.R. at wages of 16 cents per hour. He is now a machine operator with the Canada Wire Cloth Company, at 45 cents per hour. He was originally in receipt of a pension of $11.50 per month, which he commuted in 1921. He came back on pension in October, 1930, at $30.00 per month. The records disclose that this pension was granted by reason of neurosis.

He alleges that while a prisoner of war he was subjected to maltreatment which has result in pecuniary damage to him. In particular he complains of loss of health, a nervous condition and stomach trouble induced by insufficient and bad food whilst in prison comp.

An analysis of the evidence reveals:

Claimant spent practically the whole period of his captivity attached to Giessen camp, but was sent upon working parties in the vicinity. He complains chiefly of the bad and inadequate food, and has no particular complaint as to brutality and violence at the hands of the guards. At a sawmill, where he worked in 1918, abscesses broke out on his thigh. Applying for medical treat­ment he was locked up for three days, given water but no food and then marched back to Giessen, a distance of several miles. He suffered greatly from boils, which he attributes to undernourishment.

The medical record indicates that claimant suffers from nervous exhaustion, insomnia, depression, soreness in stomach and abdomen, shaking of the head and is startled by noises. His percentage of disability is stated at 20 per cent. Dr. A. M. Bell, who testified on behalf of claimant, describes him as a nervous wreck and speaks of a stomach condition. Claimant does not appear to lose much time from his work. In Dr. Bell's opinion, claimant's conditions could result from the history he gives of his experiences. He alleges that while a prisoner he was subjected to maltreatment which has resulted in pecuniary damage to him. He complains that poor food, exposure, and lack of medical attention brought on a chest condition from which he still suffers, and that this condition was aggravated by his work in a gas factory. He also complains of nervousness.

An analysis of the evidence reveals:

Claimant was taken to Dulmen camp, where he remained ten weeks and has nothing to complain of. He was then sent to Duisburg camp and complains of being made to work in the wet, to which he attributes a chest condition from which he suffers. Claimant presents one of the rare cases in which no complaint is made of physical brutality. He declares that he was never beaten and when asked how he escaped this treatment makes the very significant reply, "Keeping my mouth shut." He speaks of the doctor as very fair, but attributes his weakened chest to exposure and lack of proper medical attention. He complains of being made to work in a tin factory, out of Duisburg, where the gas fumes, against which he was furnished with practically no protection, aggravated an already impaired lung condition. For an attempted escape, claimant received only four days confinement upon recapture. Claimant also attributes to these experiences astigmatism.

There is no medical evidence in this case, not even the usual certificate from a medical practitioner. Claimant's medical history files show nothing unusual, an entry appearing that pension is under consideration, for bronchitis and astig­matism, and that he had some hospitalization for rheumatic arthritis in 1916.

Claimant told a pleasingly frank story of his life in Germany, but unfortunately for his case, he has failed to show any present disability resulting from his experiences which can be regarded as maltreatment. The claim fails for lack of medical evidence to support it. I would regard the case, in any event if disability is shown, as one for the consideration of the Board of Pension Commissioners. It is, accordingly, disallowed.

ERROL M. McDOUGALL,

Commissioner.

OTTAWA, December 8, 1931.

Originally printed on page 79 of the report