Newsletter 89
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Newsletter No. 89 – May 2017 Free to members Chairman’s Report In this Issue: Bob Flanagan • Grave Re-use at There has been much progress on developing the Stage 2 Norwood Page 3 Parks for People HLF bid. Not only has Joahanne Flah- erty taken up the position of Project Coordinator, but • Lewes Fossil also Harrison Design and Development have been Festival & appointed Project Consultants. This is advantageous as Gideon Mantell Paul Harrison has been working on the grave re-use pilot Page 5 as discussed below (p. 3) and has proved very conscient- • ious in this role. A project Steering Group has been con- Terence Arthur stituted under the chairmanship of Nicholas Long, Chair de Marney of the Scheme of Management Committee. Mr Tony (1908-1971) Burton has kindly agreed to represent the Greek Cath- Page 7 edral Trustees and I represent the Management Advisory • William Wright Group and FoWNC. The other members of the project group in addition to Joahanne and Paul are Kevin Crook, DD (1837- Dan Thomas, Steve 1899) - Part 2 Wong, and Nicola Page 9 Xuereb (all Lamb- • The Rev Charles eth), local Cllr Max Mitchell Birrell Deckers-Dowber & Elizabeth Whitbourn (1811-1880) (Historic England). Page 14 The recruitment of a • Recent FOWNC Public Engagement Events Page 18 Officer is awaited. • As regards other ma- Forthcoming tters, members may Events Page 19 have noticed the pro- • A Bit of Mystery gress in the promised scrub clearance (i) in Page 20 the St Mary-at-Hill plot and surrounding Bessemer Family grave (see p. 2) area and (ii) around Ship Path. Thanks to Kevin Wallace and his grounds maintenance team for their hard work over the winter months. I’m pleased to say that the team have really enjoyed their work in the cemetery and have been especially grateful for the kind comments received from passers-by. Other areas of scrub will be tackled over the next couple of years. There has been progress too in removing some of the dead/dangerous trees in the cemetery under the guidance of Project Officer Steve Wong, although a lot also remains to be done in this area. A Blue Plaque for Sir Henry City University plan to unveil a Blue Plaque to Sir Henry Bessemer (1813–1898: grave 27,463, square 99) at their campus in North- ampton Square on Tuesday 16 May 2017 start- ing at around 18:00. Science Museum lecturer Dr Susan Mossman will be giving a talk (see FoWNC Newsletter 80, May 2014). Henry lived at No. 15 on the north side of the square in 1833. His father, the inventor Anthony Bessemer (1758–1836), lived with the rest of the family at 8 Meredith Street opposite Northampton Square. Thanks to Sir Henry’s 8-18 Northampton Square, EC1 great, great, grandson, FoWNC supporter Paul Bessemer, for the notification of this event. FoWNC Constitution I am pleased to report that there were no objections submitted either in writing, or at the February meeting to adopting the proposed new constitution. In turn this has been accepted by the Charity Commission as part of our submission to register FoWNC as a Charitable Incorporated Organisation with the Registered Charity Number 1172409. I have placed the new Constitution on our website and we will transfer the funds from the old FoWNC charity to the new one at the end of our financial year in June. Thanks to our Treasurer Anna Long for taking the lead on the submission to the Charity Commission. Mausolea and Monuments Trust (MMT) The MMT (http://www.mmtrust.org.uk/) aims to protect and preserve mausolea and other funerary monuments in Great Britain and Ireland. This year we are to host the MMT AGM on Saturday 8 July. The business meeting at noon will be followed by lunch (£10 donation) and a tour of the cemetery. FoWNC members are welcome, but space is limited – please e-mail me if you would like to attend ([email protected]). Letts and Thomas Memorial Repair At last, and after many meetings on-site and elsewhere, a plan to complete the repairs to the ‘at-risk’ Grade 2 Listed monuments of Harriet (–1841) and Thomas (1803–1873) Letts (grave 249, square 33) and of Israel Thomas (–1842; grave 429, square 34) is nearing completion (see FoWNC Newsletter 86, May 2016). The proposed solution allows for, if possible depending on their condition, the temporary removal of the coffins, - 2 - (ii) rebuilding of the vaults, (iii) reinstatement of the coffins, (iv) back-filling with pea shingle allowing some space for further family interments if possible, and (v) monument reinstatement. Sounds simple, but not so easy in practice! This proposal has been submitted to the Diocesan Advisory Committee prior to submission to the Chancellor for approval as (i) the works are extensive and (ii) it is hoped that the proposed solution will be the template for repairs to other collapsed vaults in the cemetery. Grave Re-use at Norwood Bob Flanagan The 1994 Consistory Court judgment ruled that virtually all Lambeth’s actions in clear- ing a large proportion of the cemetery of monuments had mostly been undertaken without regard or adherence to relevant legislation. Moreover, their use of private graves (graves originally bought with exclusive rights of burial) for new burials without the knowledge 1 or permission of the original owners was illegal. Since then a further Court hearing regularised as far as was possible the position of families who unknowingly had bought burial rights in graves that already contained burials and that Lambeth had no right to sell, although the erection of new memorials on re-used graves remains a problem. In 2001 Lambeth gave formal notice that they wished to extinguish burial rights in all graves that had not been used for burials for at least 75 years, although whether this included burial of cremated remains was not clear. We objected on the grounds that Lambeth would likely then recommence wholesale clearance of monuments, and the Council backed off perhaps fearing that the Court would again find against them. In the ensuing 15 years much has changed, not least Lambeth’s attitude to FoWNC, to the Scheme of Management Committee, and to the Cemetery. Lambeth have at last realized the importance of the cemetery and have co-operated in the restoration and in some cases reinstatement of many important monuments, in scrub clearance, and in repairs to the roads and drains. Our position on re-use has not changed – we have never objected to re- use in the form of ‘lift-and-deepen’, i.e. reburial of any identifiable remains at the bottom of graves and use of the grave for new burials provided that (i) all pre-Lambeth era monuments in the Cemetery are retained/conserved, (ii) re-use should be confined to clearly identifiable graves as required by current legislation, and (iii) all burials in the grave, old and new, must be commemorated in some way on any new memorial. In addition, all other legal requirements should be met such as the requirement to obtain a faculty for operations on consecrated ground. Of course, the legacy of Lambeth’s dreadful clearance operations from the late 1960s to the early 1990s is still with us in that areas largely cleared of monuments cannot be selected for grave re-use under current legislation. This is because it is not now possible to identify the precise location of individual graves (including some war graves) in these 1 See: https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200001/cmselect/cmenvtra/91/91m59.htm for a summary of the situation as it applied in December 2000 - 3 - areas as the reference points on the ground (the memorials) were destroyed and Lambeth failed to maintain proper plans of the areas they worked on. In the last couple of years, however, detailed discussions with Lambeth have borne fruit and we have now reached a position on re-use that I and the other Trustees feel deserves support. On the one hand Lambeth have accepted our position as outlined above, and on the other the process of re-use of clearly identifiable private graves means that in the main the process will be confined to graves where a monument survives. Further safe- guards are that no listed monuments, war graves, and illegally re-sold private graves will be scheduled for re-use. All-in-all this brings the prospect of systematically working through the cemetery and cleaning and renovating existing monuments as well as commemorating those buried in identifiable graves where the monument has been lost. It is possible that in time technology will enable the positive identification of individual graves in cleared areas where no memorials exist, although this seems unlikely. An underlying consideration in all this has to be the long-term viability of the cemetery. It again seems unlikely that crematorium operations alone can sustain the cemetery. Additionally, it would perhaps be wrong to oppose the use of the cemetery for its prime purpose and to deny Lambeth residents the opportunity of burial in the only public cemetery within the Borough. A concern is that Lambeth will inevitably seek to extinguish existing burial rights in graves scheduled for re-use. However, given (i) the clear commitment to follow proper procedures, and (ii) the undertaking to keep all surviving pre-1965 memorials, and to commemorate all existing burials as well as new burials on any new memorials then it seems only sensible to support the principle of re-use of clearly defined graves meeting all necessary criteria. It is also likely that full control of the cemetery will revert to Lambeth at some stage in the next few years, with the winding-up of the Scheme of Management.