FEE NOT CHARGED FOR BURIALS

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 153, 25 March 1937, Page 15

FEE NOT CHARGED FOR BURIALS

Churches Deny Truth of Reported Statement

“MINISTERS’ SERVICES FREE OF COST’’ The statement, "Unless they arc paid for it Wellington clergymen refuse to bury impoverished people who die in the hospital,” which was reported at Tuesday night’s meeting of tlie Wellington Hospital Board to have been made by :i member of the Wellington Provincial Funeral Directors’ Association has brought denials from representatives of the churches and a reply from the chairman of the Funeral Directors’ Association. The Bishop of Wellington, the Rt. Rev. 11. St. Barbe Holland, writes to the'editor of "The Dominion” as follows :— “In reference to the statement made yesterday at the meeting of the Wellington Hospital Board, I feel that it is only fair to my clergy to state that for many years now the services of Anglican clergymen at funerals have been free. The Diocesan Synod as long ago as 1911 rescinded the then existing regulation by which a fee of 8/- was chargeable for burials.” “1 have been asked by the Presbyterian ministers to state that the assertion is entirely incorrect,” said the Rev, A. B. Kilroy, of St. Andrew’s Church, to “The Dominion." “Presbyterian ministers do not charge fees for funerals. If these are offered voluntarily the ministers usually ask that they should not be given. If, however, the fee is pressed upon the minister lie usually devotes it to the funds of his church. It is an entirely unheard-of practice for a minister to make a direct charge, least of all in the case of the poor.” He said that he did not think a fee was offered in one ease out of 20 or 30. He personally had been in Wellington for two years and a half, and on two occasions only had he received fees. These were sent by post.

REPLY BY FUNERAL DIRECTORS

“No Accusation Against Clergy as a Whole”

Mr. W. A. Wilson, chairman of the Wellington Provincial Funeral Directors’ Association, writes to the editor of “The Dominion” as follows :— “I notice that the hospital board criticised the funeral directors for submitting what they term an excessive tender for the burial of indigent persons. I think it very unfair that such prominence should be given to such a matter before the full facts are known. I think if careful inquiry was made into the goods furnished for each funeral, it would be found that it is not so much an overcharge as it is the board's unwillingness to pay adequately lor what it considers necessary. Under the contract in question we have to supply a grave, a car for the minister, a casket covered with black cloth and trimmed with a set of nickel-plated furniture with name, age and date of death written thereon. The casket has to be lined and upholstered inside, and to have swansdown side-sheets, pillow and frilling. We have to supply a hearse and bearers, and conduct funerals within the city boundaries. The price as stated only allows for bare cost, but why should we do it at a loss? “The fact that an increase of over 100 per cent, has been necessary to cover the bare cost only goes to show that the contractor, when he charged such accounts on his books, made a donation of a few pounds to charity. I know of no profession whose members as a class are more interested in, or spend more for charity or have more of the real spirit of brotherhood than have the members of the funeral directors’ profession. Necessarily the cost of funerals has advanced with the Increased cost of wages and materials, and we are bound by labour awards. Also our work calls for a 24-hour day, and a seven-day-a-week service. Taking all this into consideration, it will be realised that the funeral directors are rendering a very reasonable service compared with prices charged in years gone by. Unfortunately, with competitive tendering the price has not advanced in conformity with advancing costs. The tenders were really unsatisfactory and unprofitable to the profession. “As regards the fee charged by some of the clergy and to which the ministers’ association take exception, let me assure them that no accusation was made against them as a body. While some ministers are willing (and we do have some very fine public-spirited ministers in this city who are always willing to render service to members of their own denomination), others refuse unless paid a fee. When they interviewed the board the other day nothing was further from the thoughts of the representatives of «ur association than to include all ministers, and no such term as ’all’ was used. But as some demand a fee we included in our tender at present under review a fee for tlie minister. and this we claim to be a fair and just charge for the necessary services rendered, no matter what denomination. In the mental hospital contract such a fee is allowed, and we think that the ministers of Wellington should receive the same consideration.”

POSITION AT DUNEDIN No Payment Asked For By Telegraph—l’rcss Association. Dunedin, March 24. When the report of the discussion at Hie Wellington Hospital Board meeting was referred to him the Bishop of Dunedin, Rt. Rev. IV. A. It. Fitchett, stated that no payment was asked for burials at Dunedin. Clergy sometimes received something sent on later, but in many cases were themselves out. of pocket. He had never heard of clergy refusing io bury the impoverished. The Rev. W. A. Stevely (Presbyterian) stated that not only did clergymen willingly bury the impoverished who died in hospital, but they also followed up by giving assistance to the relatives where necessary. He added that ministers had buried as many as four in one day without monetary return.