FUNERAL EXPENSES.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 11856, 20 May 1909, Page 5

FUNERAL EXPENSES.

Aji interesting sequel to tho funeral *>f a late inmate of the Old Men's Home transpired *at the Magistrate' si Court today, before Mr W. A. Barton, S.M., when Gtundy and Hhennan (Mr R. 13. Burke) sued Hugh C. Anderson (Mr G. Stock) for £?> ■ .burial exiwn/ies. George L. Shannan gave evidence that on February 18 he received instructions from the custodian <rf tho Old Men's Home respecting the burial of a deceased inmateThese were accordingly complied with. The following day .defendant cumo and asked that the account should be charged to him, as ho did not \rant the dccoased to be buried by charitable aid. Nothing was said about the price. Defendant was accordingly charged £7. The amount charged on charitable aid funerals was J53 10s. They could not have charged defendant the charitable aid rate, us they were under special arrangements with Messrs Redstone and Sons, whom they paid 15s for a charitable .did • funeral and. £2v ss for. an . ordinary funeral, whilst the Cemetery trustees were paid 12a od or fil 5s respectively. /' As it -was "previovisly understood to be a charitabiei aid funeral, he advised Mr Redstone, m view of defenaant.'s assurance/ to -charge them- as son m ordinary 'rimeral. . ' O^ie pound was deducted from, -the ,■ ordinary f unera 1 Charge .on .account, of the finish of the gasket. By Air Stock: No- demand had been -made* 'by either the .Cemetery trus : ijoeH or Redfitories' for. the additional (jharg© beyond a< xmuper'^ huieriil, bub if lie recovered tho case( v he, m diity. bound, pay theln the additional, amount. [. Defendant depoecd that he had known qeeeaadd,. i§v -a N . iottg Jtjtne, ! .andj hKVrjng 'of jb'is death and buriaM deah-ed to pay, tiho ' funeraj expeu?es, ratJier than allow it;tp wmam on.tho books aa a pauper's runerdl. He inquired ;of the Town C!lerk\ che. amouiit , the Charitable (Aid : Boaj-d would be ; Jitthle for the fuheral. and apoertaihihg that- it was £3 ss,, volunteered to the amount. ; Mr Rob^inrjori Mfori^f him to.af^ndy arid Shennui), io sivre vthe, Horn ; going through ■ the book^. > '■■ Ho saw :Mr .Shennan, and undertopk to pay the expenses. H*d ho known' < h^- was to be charged £7 he would-, haye reused, to beconfc indebted, iflid M-o\ild have pntd the smaller amount iiito tho Gi'dritabk Aid Board fiuid«. j H!is "Worship said that he was perfectly ttatitrfiad that at the time defendant yeqiuosted plaintiffs to »?nd him the riccount he only intended to niake him-stelf-liable for the amount that? would be paid by the Charitable Aid Roird. Under tlio circumstances, pJaintifffl should Have accepted the' amount' pajd info Court (£3 13s), for which judgment was given, with cofets to' defendant- £2 Is.