CEMETERY CHARGES

Evening Star, Issue 19952, 23 August 1928, Page 2

CEMETERY CHARGES

DEPUTATION TO CITY COUNCIL NO CHANGE TO BE MADE At the meeting of the City Council lust night a deputation representing the Council of Christian Churches, the Hospital Hoard, and the Undertakers’ Association waited on the council with regard to the recent increase in burial charges. The Rev. Mr tl. JS. Bellhouse expressed pleasure at the opportunity which was given them of bringing this matter before the council. The deputation had waited on the Reserves Committee some few weeks ago, but the reply was not very favourable. He spoke on behalf of the poorer people in the community With'regard to tho financial aspect ol the matter, he under stood that at the deputation to ’he Reserves Committee the town clerk had stated that the reason for the increased charges was that the cemetery account must stand by ’itself. He understood the shortage in the account was duo to the two older cemeteries, the Northern and the Southern, not to the Anderson’s Hay Cemetery, which paid for itself. He thought it was unfair that people who were now compelled to use the main cemetery should be compelled to pay for the two older cemeteries. A reference to the ‘ Year Hooks ’ from 1911 to 1927 showed that in 1911 the balance standing to the credit of the cemetery account was £6,178 11s 7d. He asked if it was a legitimate proposition to regard that credit balance as holding good year by year until now. with interest at 0 per cent. He suggested that it did ic-H good. Allowing for the fact that in some years the expenditure bad exceeded the income, and in other years the income exceeded the expenditure, if interest was allowed at 0 per cent, the credit balance should now stand at £8,066.

Mr Bellliouso went on to quote the burial charges of other cities. In Christchurch, for example, the charges for double lots were:—First-class. £•!: second-class lots, £2 U)s; single lots, £1 ss. In Wellington the charge for first-class lota was £5; for second-class, £3. In Auckland the price was £4. In Oaraaru, the nearest largo town to Dunedin. the price was £1 For single lots. The charge to be made in Dunedin for special first-class lots was £ls; for firstclass lots, £6; and for second-class lots, £3. Mr Rellhouse said it seemed rather extraordinary that the Dunedin City Council should feel that it was obliged to impose charges so much higher than those of other cities. A Councillor: We do not want them to die.

Mr Dollhouse: That is a very charitable suggestion. For some years past, continued Mr Bellhouse, the council had boasted about the profits it made in corporation undertakings, and it seemed strange that their burial fees were higher than they were in any other city in the dominion. He considered ■ that the decision that tho cemetery account should stand on its own should be rconsidered by the council. The new Town Hall was being built out of accumulated profits, and be suggested that it was a reasonable thing that accumulated profits in other departments should be used to make up the deficiency in the cemetery account. In concluding, Mr Bellhouse said he humbly wished to that the council was not justified in imposing those very largely-increased charges: that the council ought not to make the cemetery account to stand on its own; and, if there be any shortage in that account, that the council should transfer amounts from the general account to cover the deficiency. In the interests of the poorer people in the community they should carefully consider the whole question, and if it should see its way clear to do so, to revert to tho old charges. Mr W. E. S. Knight (chairman of the Hospital Board) supported what Mr Bellhouse had said. As far as tho Hospital Board was concerned, the new charges did not affect it very much, if at all, except indirectly in so far as it affected tho taxpayers. To him, however, the rates aid seem excessive. Cr Black: Perhaps Mr Knight might quote what' the Hospital Board’s charges were in 1011 and 1923 to show how much its charges had gone up also. Mr Mitchell said he wished to ask the following questions: Is it a fact that any hardship is imposed on the poor, is it suggested that general ratepayers should make up the deficit, and is it realised that practically no increase is asked from the poor? Cr Black asked if tho deputation knew of any case of a poor person who had been unable to get a plot free, if necessary, from the corporation. Mr Bellhouse said he did not know of any such case. He thought any person would be too proud to ash for a plot. With regard to Cr Mitchell’s questions, he expressed regret that he did not have the actual figures with him. Cr Mitchell; The increase is only in the expensive plots. The cheaper ones were increased only 10s Mr Bellhouse: If it is only an increase of 10s I would not have been in the deputation. I thought they were much heavier than that. The deputation was thanked for its attendance by His Worship, and then withdrew. Cr Hayward moved that the matter be referred back to the Reserves Cointo be reviewed. Cr Clark seconded the motion. Cr Black said that the Reserves Committee had very fully considered the matter, and could not come to any other decision. Cr Mitchell supported Cr Black, and moved that a reply be sent on the same lines as that sent by the Reserves Committee. This was seconded by Cr Munro and carried.