BARON PIGOTT’S FUNERAL.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4553, 23 October 1875, Page 2 (Supplement)

BARON PIGOTT’S FUNERAL.

At Basingstoke one Wednesday, before a full bench of magistrates. Mr. Arthur G. Pigott, eldest son of the late Baron Pigott, appeared to answer a charge of unlawfully disturbing the Rev. Alfred Gresley Barker, whilst ministering the rite of burial in the churchyard of Sheffield on Loddon, on May -Ith. Mr. Arthur Walker, solicitor, was also included in the information, but the charge as against him was withdrawn, as he was acting under the instructions of Mr. Pigott, who undertook all responsibility. Mr. Staveley Hill, Q. 0., M.P., who prosecuted, narrated the circumstances of the case, and then referred to the law bearing on it, 21 and 24 Viet., c. 32, known as the Brawling Act. It appeared that for some time there had been a controversy on religious subjects between the rector, Mr. Barker, and the late Baron, which continued till the death of the latter, though with perfect good feeling on both sides. Mr. Barker received notice of Baron Pigott’s death while in Devon. Several telegrams and letters passed between the defendant, who is a member of the sect known as the Plymouth Brethren, and Mi - . Barker, the latter consenting to allow any .clergyman the family might select to perforin the service, though bound by law to have no deviation from the Church service. Further correspondence revealed defendant’s intention of having the body buried without any religious service whatever. The rector returned on the night preceding the funeral, and obtained junior counsel’s opinion, and also verbal opinion of Mr. Osborne Morgan, both of which strengthened him in his resolve to use the Church service over deceased if buried in the churchyard. Defendant had au interview with Mr. Barker on the morning of the funeral, and said he had legal advice that he might have the body buried in the churchyard without any service, and intended doing so. Mr. Barker replied that he was prepared with a protest, should he be disturbed in the performance of the service. He was not aware, as was now asserted, that the late Baron, shortly before his death, joined the Plymouth Brethren. The rector and the curate met the corpse at the lychgate, and the former w r as apprised ,by the , undertaker that service was not to be commenced, .and proceeded towards the church, -when ho discovered that the funeral procession had turned off to the grave near the church gates, and the coffin was being hurriedly lowered. There was a considerable uproar, and the curate commenced reading sentences at the grave, when Mr. Walker advanced and said, “As representative of the executor, I protest against the continuance of this service.” The clergymen then closed their books and withdrew, a protest being handed to Mr. Walker by Mr. Tubb, one of the churchwardens. Defendant commenced his case by stating that his father, shortly before his death, had deliberately left the Church of England and joined the Plymouth Brethren, and hence his (defendant's) objection to the service, this being shared by the family generally. He argued. that Mr. Barker was only a volunteer at the funeral, and not in performance of his duty, and that ho was not disturbed. Several members of the family were called, and expressed their approval of the defendant’s arrangements respecting the funeral, and denied there ,was any disturbance, or fchat the corpse was interred in an unseemly manner. The latter particulars were corroborated by the undertaker, some of the bearers, and'others.' The Bench retired for about half au hour, and on their return, the chairman announced that they wore unanimously agreed that defendant was guilty of au offence against tho Act, and convicted him in a penalty of ;£l, and costs. Defendant applied for a special case for the Court of Queen’s Bench, which was granted.