not afford to place the lots under perpetual 
care or were not interested enough to do so. 
Comparatively little was gained by this 
attempt and it is fair to assume that after 
a certain number of years have passed it is 
very difficult to get old lots placed under 
perpetual care unless some provision for 
doing so has been made by will and they 
automatically come under perpetual care 
when some member of the family dies. Let 
me emphasize right here that we are talk- 
ing now about lots which were sold nearly 
fifty years ago and during that period many 
attempts have been made to have the lots 
placed under perpetual care by letters, cir- 
culars and personal appeal. 
Let us now consider the care which 
should be given every lot in a well kept 
cemetery. The surface of the ground 
should be kept level, graves raised imme- 
diately after sinking, season of the year 
permitting, and the lot covered with a good 
growth of grass which is kept reasonably 
free from weeds and regularly cut dur- 
ing the growing season ; all dead leaves, 
flowers, etc., to be cleaned from the lots 
as needed and the grass fertilized at least 
once a year under ordinary conditions. If 
there are any trees or shrubs on or near 
the lot these should be cultivated, pruned 
and kept free from insect pests. All stone 
work should be erected on foundations 
built by the cemetery and therefore kept in 
place without expense to the lot owner as 
part of the guarantee given by the cemetery 
when building the foundation. Cleaning of 
monuments should be optional with the lot 
owner and only attempted when special ar- 
rangements for that purpose are made. If 
placed under perpetual care a special fund 
should be charged for that purpose. 
If we started our cemetery without an 
arrangement for perpetual care we made 
a mistake and should we not share part 
of the penalty? This is the way we now 
feel at Forest Hills and now it seems only 
right that we should give all lots practi- 
cally the same care as far as the general 
work is concerned. Let me say here that 
I believe that a lot owner whose lot is under 
annual care should pay enough annually to 
provide exactly the same care as a lot 
under perpetual care. Let me also say that 
PARK AND CEMETERY 
should the cemetery feel that it cannot af- 
ford to continue the free care on old lots 
it can at any time stop that work as no 
guarantee has ever been given. 
What New England cemetery does not 
give a certain amount of free care? Are 
not practically all lots cut several times a 
year? Why? Because it has been found it 
pays, either for the looks of the cemetery 
or Ijecause the growth of weeds menaces 
the cared for sections. How much more 
does it really cost to cut all lots all the 
time? Why should we not raise all sunken 
graves even if we have to charge enough 
for our interments to cover the cost? Why 
should we forever try to give people a 
cheap job when what they want is a well 
kept cemetery and when the matters are 
explained to them the majority are willing 
to pay the bill ? Why should we allow them 
to plant trees and shrubs unless we are 
willing to see that they have decent care? 
We do not attempt to take care of annual 
plants on lots and the time may come and 
I hope soon when these can be eliminated. 
The cost for their care is beyond us and 
for that reason I only mention them in 
passing. 
In single grave sections where graves 
have been sold without perpetual care of 
the grass we do not attempt to give much 
free care for the reason that the expense 
of putting graves under perpetual care is 
not so large and we feel it is well worth 
making the graves not under perpetual care 
object lessons. We are, however, gradually 
giving the older single grave sections more 
care than the newer ones ; in fact, we have 
two small sections of single graves which 
are very old and to which we give the same 
care given to lot sections. 
It may be interesting to quote from a 
letter received October 1st, from one of the 
largest Chicago cemeteries. 
‘‘For the first time in history this year 
during the latter part of the season we 
have discontinued cutting the grass on the 
uncared for lots. As an actual fact this is 
the line of a campaign which we are under- 
taking, but we do not find that it is saving 
us a great deal of money. I am pretty well 
convinced of one thing and that is that if 
we abolished all the grave mounds and 
245 
carefully and properly cut the grass on all 
lots in the cemetery it would not cost us as 
much r.s it does now to cut the grass on the 
perpetual and annual care lots including the 
trimming of the mounded graves. At that I 
think we have as small a percentage of 
mounded graves as do most of the ceme- 
teries which are not absolutely prohibiting 
them.” 
Finally, what is the result of our experi- 
ence? Our old lots are being placed under 
care as rapidly now as they were ten years 
ago. Our perpetual care fund is growing 
from this source just as fast. In the 
single grave sections we are slowly gaining 
in number of graves under perpetual care 
in the recently sold sections owing to the 
object lesson of comparison of no care 
graves with those under perpetual care. 
The whole cemetery looks better by far 
than it used to under the old method and 
the number of complaints from lot owners 
is very materially reduced ; in fact, we 
might almost say we do not have an}'. It is 
certain that as a means of advertising there 
seems to be nothing better as is shown by 
comparing our results in lot sales with that 
of cemeteries in the West, where actual ad- 
vertising has been tried. In a reply from 
another Chicago cemetery man on this 
point I find he strongly advocates care as 
the best advertising medium obtainable and 
emphasizes the fact that it is cumulative in 
results. Certainly our lot sales during the 
last six years average very much aljove 
those of any previous six years. 
In discussing this subject I believe we 
may say it is only the degree of care we are 
after and that the little extra care neces- 
sary in the older sections of the cemetery 
is a very small item of expense when we 
consider the results. Lastly let us realize 
our first duty to our lot owners is to keep 
the cemetery beautiful and do the things 
they want done if it is a possible thing. 
I say by all means it does pay to care for 
lots which are not under perpetual care 
and that, that care should increase as the 
sections become older where no care lots 
are to be found until every lot or grave 
in the cemetery has practically the same 
care. How better can we spend that part 
of our income which is given over to the 
general embellishment of the cemetery? 
Problems of Park and Cemetery Law 
A department of Legal Advice and Discussion on problems that confront 
parks and cemeteries. You are invited to ask questions vchich will be an- 
szvered by an attorney without charge. A. L. H. Street, Consulting Attorney. 
Church Cemeteries and Special 
Assessments 
The Minnesota Supreme Court has af- 
firmed judgment in favor of the city of St. 
Paul in litigation with the local diocese of 
the Roman Catholic church, affecting the 
right of the city to enforce against cem- 
etery grounds of the church a special 
assessment on account of a sewer improve- 
ment constructed in an abutting street. 
The court holds that the church could 
not claim exemption from liability for the 
assessment on the theory that the society 
was a public cemetery association, within 
the provision of section 6286 of the Min- 
nesota Statutes : “The lands and property 
of any such cemetery association shall be 
exempt from all public taxes and assess- 
ments." It is decided that Calvary Cem- 
etery, the grounds in question (and, by the 
way, the court notes the interesting fact 
that the cemetery was established two 
years before Minnesota became a state), 
must be regarded as a mere adjunct of 
the religious society’s activities. 
And it is declared that right to claim 
exemption as a private cemetery was pre- 
cluded by the fact that there had been no 
