Mr. KINGasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether, when a public cemetery, administered under the Burial Acts, 1852 to 1900, has been divided into two parts, and one part has been consecrated, the Home Office sanc- 363 tion the application of the designation Nonconformist ground to the part which has not been consecrated?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Churchill)It does not rest with the Home Office to give any sanction with regard to the terms by which the various parts of a burial ground may be designated.
Mr. KINGIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that this designation "Nonconformist" has been applied m Birkenhead for the first time in the history of the Burials Acts and that it has excited very strong opposition? Will he, under the circumstances, make some inquiry into the matter?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI am afraid I must have notice with regard to that question.
Mr. KINGasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that recently the vicar of St. Crantock, Cornwall, refused to permit the burial of a Nonconformist, who had lived for more than seventy years in the parish, to take place in the grave in which the wife of the deceased was buried in the parish churchyard, unless at the burial the rites of the Established Church were observed, on the ground that the deceased had lost the rights of a parishioner; and whether he will initiate legislation with the object of making Section 1 of the Burial Laws Amendment Act, 1880, applicable to the burial of Nonconformists who in relation to the place of burial may be non-parishioners?
§ Mr. SWIFT MacNEILLBefore the right hon. Gentleman answers, will he say if he will postpone the initiation of legislation until there is some chance of its being carried in another place?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe Burial Laws Amendment Act of 1880 authorised, in certain circumstances, the burial of deceased persons in consecrated ground without the performance of the Church of England service, but at the same time expressly provided (in Section 9) that it did not authorise the burial of any person in any place where such persons would have had no right of interment if the Act had not passed. In the present case the deceased person appears not to have had any right of interment, and I am advised that the vicar was therefore within his rights in 364 refusing burial unless the condition he imposed was complied with. I am sure that this harsh and narrow action on the part of the vicar, though no doubt dictated by conscientious scruples, will be viewed with reprobation by all right thinking people, whatever their religious opinions may be. I will consider whether I can find an opportunity to propose an alteration of the law which would prevent the recurrence of similar incidents.
§ Mr. MORRELLWill the right hen. Gentleman give the name of this harsh and narrow-minded vicar?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI think sufficient indication is given in the question.
§ Mr. MacNEILLWill the right hon. Gentleman recommend him for promotion?