Maltreatment of Prisoners of War

The claimant was a Private in the 10th Battalion, - Regimental No. 20452. He enlisted in August, 1914, at the age of 22 years. He was taken prisoner April 24, 1915, during the second battle of Ypres, suffering from multiple gunshot wounds in the shoulder and both legs. He was repatriated to England August 8, 1916. He is in receipt of a 60 per cent disability pension, amounting to about $92 a month for himself and family, based on the amputation of his right leg and arthritis. He is married and has four children. Prior to enlistment, he was employed as a clerk with the Dominion Government, and after his discharge he continued in the employ of the Government, until he was let out due to the break up in the Department of the Interior.

He alleges that while a prisoner he was subjected to maltreatment which has resulted in pecuniary damage to him. He complains that while being detained as a prisoner in Germany for nine months, his wounded leg did not receive adequate treatment, with the result that blood poisoning set in and the leg was amputated without his consent in May, 1916. It was re-amputated on August 1, 1916.

Claimant confines his complaint to two grounds; first, that lack of proper medical attention in German hospitals caused infection to set in, with the result that his leg was amputated; and second, that the leg was amputated without his consent. He complains of no particular acts of brutality, but contends that had he received proper medical attention he would not have lost his leg. He declares that at Senne-lager, in hospital, blood poisoning set in, and that in opening the wound to drain it, the surgeon removed the leg below the knee without claimant's knowledge. It is only necessary to quote from claimant's statement upon repatriation, to show that his treatment in hospital cannot he regarded as 'maltreatment". He says "I had in all five operations (as the ankle was so badly damaged, I thought there was little chance of saving it, but evidently the doctors, thought otherwise) and always under anaesthetic. However, as I contracted blood poisoning at Senne-lager, where I was sent later, it was found necessary to amputate the leg. I had never, in the circumstances, any reason for complaint as regards the treatment of the doctors and nurses, all nationalities, so far as one could see, being treated the same."

It is unnecessary to proceed further with the case. Claimant has not shown maltreatment whilst a prisoner in Germany—quite the reverse in fact. His claim must, accordingly, be disallowed.

ERROL M. McDOUGALL,

Commissioner,

OTTAWA, December 9, 1931.

Originally printed on page 24 of the report