THE CEMETERY TROUBLE

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 296, 11 June 1912, Page 8

THE CEMETERY TROUBLE

VENTILATED BY THE COUNCIL. COUNCILLOR BUTTIMORE EXPLAINS. The cemetery trouble, involving the dismissal of the sexton with a month's j notice, was ventilated in open Council at last night's meeting of the Borough Council. PETITION IN FAVOR OF ffHE SEXTON. At the outset, a petition was received from four residents (Messrs. W. T. and E. R. Coad, and G. A. and W. C. Coleman) asking the Council to reconsider the matter. The communication ran as follows:—"As four of your most loyal supporters and as residents who have absolute confidence in your love of fair play, we sincerely hope you will give the Council a lead in seeing that justice is done to Mr. Hunt, the sexton. We have I known and respected him very highlyfor some years. He is too straight and capable a man to be dismissed for so small a matter, especially when allowance is made for the difficulty always cropping up through those who do not respect others' rights. The beautiful order in which the place is kept speaks for itself, Some of our friends state that prior to his coming they had not been able to get to their mothers' graves for three years because of the rank growth surrounding that part. Now every grave is accessible and many appreciate the beautiful way the place is kept. Your long e rience and capable judgment will indii - ,e to you the right course to take. We are certain that not only the Council, but throughout the borough there are many who will agree that the wiser course for the Council would be to reconsider the case. We are writing, not at the request of Mr. Hunt or his friends, but simply because as citizens we wish to see justice done. There seems a unanimous feeling that dismissal is a punishment out of all proportion to the offence—if any offence was really committed. As a thoroughly capable and painstaking servant Mr. Hunt has gained the respect of tha community; his respect for the feelings of bereaved people has often been noticed at funerals, and not every sexton is thoughtful enough to suitably dress himself for these occasions, especially at personal inconvenience. Feeling sure vou will do what you feel to be right." Two other letters in much the same strain were read from Messrs. F. Hales and G. H. Maunder. In a lengthy speech, Cr. Buttimore gave what he considered a true statement of the whole position. "It has been stated," he remarked, "that Mr. Hunt was dismissed without any chance of defending himself. I maintain that that is wholly incorrect. To prove this I now ask the town clerk to read the letter (embodying the complaint) received from Mr. Francis, together with Mr. Hunt's reply thereto."

THAT LETTER. Mr. Francis' letter ran as follows: "After employing a man and going to' the expense to clear up and plant shrub 3 in my plot at the cemetery, this morning (April 4) I found all the weeds and rubbish thrown all over the same. Much to my disgust the sexton (Mr. Hunt) informed me that he himself put this rubish back over the grave. His excuse was that the by-laws had been broken. Now. gentlemen, I think it only fair that he should have notified me or the man who did the work instead of doing what he did." , THE SEXTON'S REJOINDER. The reply of the sexton (Mr. E. Hunt) ran as follows; " I understand from a telephone message received from you that Mr. Francis has complained of my action in returning rubbish, thrown out of his grave plot and not removed to the proper place; Not knowing the contents of his letter, I can only say what was said. Mr. Francis asked me if I kn«w anything about the rubbish in his plot. I said, "Yes, it was thrown out of your plot and left, and I threw it hack.' "Very well,' he said, 'that is all I wanted to know. lam going to write to the Council about it, and it will be a pretty sarcastic letter, too.' I wish to remind your Council that I have on several occasions removed rubbish and flow( vs, etc., that have been thrown out of his plot and left, but this was considered the work of children and not worthy of notice. In the above case, the plot had been cleaned up by some one, whom I considered should be held responsible, and to meet such a one and remind him of the by-law and ask him to kindly take his rubbish to the proper place in the future, I adopted the above method, I beg leave to say that the above method is considered' by those who have occasion to know it the better of two ways of educating the people to carry out the by-law, and meets with less resistance and is often effectual without word or comment. I take the opportunity to give this information that whereas four years ago about 20 per cent, carried their rubbish to the heap, now quite (50 per cent, do so, and only two per cent, object to the above plan."

THE DISCUSSION. " ' | Resuming, Cr. Buttimore said that the letters road gave the lie direct to the statement that Mr. Hunt had not been given an opportunity of defending himself, and he also proceeded to deny in very plain terms the allegation that he (the speaker) threw rubbish that came oft' Mr. Francis's grave over adjoining graves. Mr. Hunt here interjected: That is un-1 true; it is a deliberate falsehood! Mr. Buttimore then went on to saythat Mr. Hunt admitted having thrown rubbish back on to graves "to teacn people a lesson." Two wrongs did not make a right, however. He had also from time to time received other com-! plaints about the sexton pursuing the same practice. He (the speaker) had' then told the sexton that he had no right j to act as he had clone. I Mr. Hunt: You told me nothing of the sort. Cr. Buttimore: I told him what the correct thing to do was—that there was a by-law, and that the right thing would have been to write to the Council. This stuff was taken from the rubbish heap and thrown on the grave. He says he does not like desecrating graves. Well, if that is not desecrating

graves I don't know what is! Proceeding, Cr. Buttimore related how, on relating the Francis episode to the Mayor, His Worship had advised him that he liad every right to suspend the sexton, but he (the speaker) preferred to let the Reserves Committee first investigate the matter. That body decided to ask the sexton for an explanation. It was only after then that it was decided to | dispense with his services. The speaker added that there had been a continued amount of discontent for a long time past on the part of the public at the way in which the sexton was carrying out his duties. Mr. Hunt had said that it was the custom of sextons in many other cemeteries to return rubbish to the graves from which it had been taken when it was placed 011 an adjoining plot. Cr. Buttimore. questioned this assertion, and said he hoped it was not so. He did not remember Cr. Ambury having stated at a previous meeting -that, as chairman of the committee, he (the speaker) should have had more sense than to have infringed the cemetery bylaws. Councillors knew perfectly well tha'. he did not bring the question of Mr. Hunt's dismissal before the Council. Neither did lie propose or second the motion embodying the requisite notice. Cr. Buttimore then deplored the fact that committee information had been dij vulged, for such breach of confidence must palpably have taken place. He ' then went on to combat the assertion , that Mr. Hiftit was infallible, and that there had been no previous complaints. Mr. Hunt himself had admitted that he could not agr'ee with his views. To him it seemed that the sexton was a very obstinate man, and in this connection he quoted a recommendation passed by the committee in March, 1911, that the sexton be placed under the control of the borough engineer. The obvious inference of this was that the sexton was not giving every satisfaction. In fact, 1 he believed that the reason why the motion was passed was that it was stated : that "the man would do nothing that ; he was told." Cr. Buttimore then con- ! eluded by charging the sexton with hav- ' ing on three occasions left his duties as , sexton in order to do odd jobs at his own . home.

During the progress of Cr. Buttimore's remarks the sexton, who, with several citizens, was present throughout the proceedings, had to be called to order for interjecting. In a few remarks the Mayor testified as to haying seen the grave on which the earth had been thrown back. He was aware that complaints had previously been laid against the sexton, and when he heard of the latest trouble he had remarked to the chairman that he now had something definite to go upon. Therefore he advised him to suspend Hunt, pending an inquiry. Had he been chairman he would have certainly carried out that course. Cr. Clarke stated that the sexton had gone the wrong way about seeking re- ! dress, and the action of his friends in I so rushing into print had been most unIfortunate for him (the sexton). It was .not the first time Mr. Hunt had been | the cause of complaint. Anyhow, the moment the Council and one of its [officials could not agree, it was time for the employee to receive marching orders. The Council should have, and did have, the power to dismiss any of its employees. It was not wise to sack the Council; therefore a man whom they could not get on with as a body had to go. It was most unfortunate that the chairman of the Reserves Committee had been mixed up in the matter. It was for the Council and not for the sexton to say how the cemetery should be run, and if councillors made a blunder they were responsible to the ratepayers. The Council was answerable to no official. The proper course for the sextion was to interview the Council and ask it to re-open the case. Mr. Hunt, however, had thrown away this opportunitv.

A LAST SUPPORTER. Cr. Jackson mentioned that Mr. Hunt had approached him in the matter. He (the speaker) then advised him to make a statement to the Council, but he refused absolutely. At the previous meeting he had come to the conclusion that the Council had acted hastily, and that Mr. Hunt should have an opportunity to defend himself. He had refused to avail himself of this chance, and in consequence he (Cr. Jackson) was not now prepared to be a party to the Council going back on its decision. Cr. Clarke then touched upon the subject of the disinterment of the body of a child, about which Mr. Hunt had complained. In the light of the facts whiclf he placed before the meeting he considered that this unpleasant duty had been caused by the sexton's own neglect. At this stage the Mayor read the order under the hand of the Governor-in-Council authorising the Council to disinter the body in question. In remarking that there were two sides to every question, Cr. Ambury said that the Council had not had a definite explanation of the whole matter until that evening. He repeated what he had remarked at a previous Meeting of the Council to the effect that the chairman | of the Reserves Committee had admitted breaking a by-law. To the speaker's mind Cr. Buttimore shouul be the last man to infringe the regulations. Cr. Buttimore had said that, he (Cr. Ambury) was somewhat wrong in his assertion, but he held that his explanation was not sufficient to satisfy him (the speaker). The chairman had undertaken ithe work of cleaning a certain man's grave, and in doing so he had placed a portion of the spoil on the burial ground, which constituted a breach of the by-laws, and he (the chairman) knew it. Cr. Ambury concluded by say-

ing that he was exceedingly sorry that the sexton had lost his opportunity of making a statement of defence by going about things in a wrong manner. Returning to the attack on the sexton, Cr. Buttimore devoted much energy to a criticism of the editorial article touching on the cemetery scandal, which had appeared in the Daily News of reicent date. To his mind the article was not a sub-leader, but a "mis-leader." In so many words he marvelled at the | ignorance of the writer in making asserj tions without first hearing both sides of the question, and in the same breath he (the speaker) went on to say that the reason why his statement of the case was not published was because he preferred to pursue the proper cause, viz., reserving his comment until the Council I meeting. [newspaper CRITICISM RESENTED. | Reverting to the sexton, Cr. Buttimore heatedly ejaculated! "I did not recom-

mend his dismissal I don't know how any editor coiAl bring himself down by making a statement he did not know." ■' ondudin", lie denied the assertion of the News that at the time of the disinterment of the body of the child he was chairman of the committee. The article in the News was a disgrace, so much so that the least thing the editor could do was to publicly apologise. Voices: Nonsense! Nonsense! This closed the episode. The letters received bearing on the subject were, on the motion of Cr. Buttimore, merely received.