KARORI CEMETERY

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 192, 3 May 1918, Page 7

KARORI CEMETERY

CASE IN APPEAL COURT IS ADDITION A NEW BURIAL GROUND? The Wellington City Corporation is desirous of. extending tho area of its cemetery at Karori, but the Ivarori Borough Council has raised objection, arid the dispute was referred to tho Supremo Court, wh6n His Honour Mr. Justico Chapman decided against tho claims. of tho City Corporation, and from this decision the corporation appealed yesterday before the Court of Appoai. On the Bench wero His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), Mr. Justice Cooper, and Mr. Justico Sim. Mr. J. O'Shea, City Solicitor, appeared for tile Wellington City. Council, appellant, and Mr. A. do B. Brandon for tho Karori Borough Council, respondent. Mr. O'Shea, in opening tho case for tho appellant, said that a very difficult question had arisen out of the construction of tho complicated Act concerned with the establishment of the Karori Cemetery. Tho New Zealand Act was a consolidation of various English Acts relating to burial grounds. Tho restrictions of burials in England originated in nn A«t of 1852, and tho New Ze.ilaiid Act of IMS was in 'jffect a consolidation of the English Act of 1882. In New Zealand there was an absolute restriction of burials—that was,, that no cemetery should be established in a borough or town district. Tho English Acts of 185!) and 1853 prohibited burials in certain districts in tho interests of public health. Burial grounds could bs closed in the interests of public health. His Honour the Chief Justice: The whole question is te to whether tho proposed extension of the Karori Cemetery is or is aot establishing a new burial ground. Mr. O'Sliert: It is a question whether wo can add to an old cemetery. Tho now cemetery adjoins the old, and I contend that it is merely an expansion of the old one.

His Honour: A cemetery; according ro tlio Act, is enclosed by a fence. Tho cemetbry at Karori is so enclosed. Mr. O'Shesv: Not all of it. His Honour: Then the law is not being observed by Hie City Council. Mr. O'Shca: The Karori Cemetery is in a peculiar condition. Portion of it had been separated for a playing area. The back of the cemetery had not been fenced. His Honour: You do not mean_ to say that the City Council has been violating the'law! Cattle could stray into, the cemetery otf the hills. Mr. O'Shca, continuing, 6'aid that tho addition proposed to tho cemetery could not be said to fit in with the definition of establishing a cemetery. His Honour: Will not this new piece of I ground comprise a new cemetery ? ' Mr. O'Shea: It means that it' wo caiiI not extend the cemetery His Honour: You havo a remedy. Yon can present a petition to Parliament to have this" area of land excluded from tho Karori Borough. Mr. O'Shca: That is what I havo suggested, and wo niay have to adopt that course. His Honour: Do the Karori people bury their dead there? Mr. O'Shea: Yes. His Honour: You can prevent them, Mr. O'Shca: No, Your Honour. Any person has a right to bury his dead in a public cemetery. His Honour: I did not know that. Mr. Brandon, for the respondent, said the underlying policy of the Cemeteries Act was to prevent the burial of the dead in localities where thore was likely to bo a number <,f inhabitants. No question could ariso as to the niceties of the meaning of the words in the Act. He cited two cases under tho English Act '(an Act very similar to the New Zealand Act) where it was decided that an additional piecri of land acquired for the purpose of a Inirial ground Was a now burial ground; further that an extension of an old burial ground constituted tho opening of a now burial ground, The Court reserved its decision.