PARK AND C EM ET ER Y. 
NEW LEGISLATION FOR THE CARE OF CEMETERIES 
There has recently been an almost 
simultaneous awakening in five states 
of the Central West and one in the East 
to the necessity of better care of ceme- 
teries, manifested in the effort to get 
legislation for the purpose of legalizing 
the establishment of funds for care of 
cemetery lots. In many states incor- 
porated cemetery associations, and in 
some cases even townships and county 
organizations, cannot legally hold funds 
for the perpetual care of lots. In Illi- 
nois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, 
and Iowa, legislation has been intro- 
duced, and is now being considered 
by the legislatures for the purpose of 
legalizing the raising of funds for the 
care of cemetery lots. In New Hamp- 
shire, an act has just been passed. 
In Illinois, a determined effort is 
being made to secure the passage of 
House bill No. 130, and every ceme- 
tery official and everj^ citizen who is 
interested in the betterment of the 
condition of cemeteries should ex- 
press definitely to his Representative 
and Senator his desire to have this 
measure passed. The same means 
should be used in the other states for 
the passage of the measures referred 
to here. 
The Supreme Court of Illinois has 
held that in the absence of a specific 
statute it is unconstitutional for a 
cemetery association or company to 
receive bequests or money by will, in 
perpetual trust, for the perpetual care 
of cemetery lots, graves and monu- 
ments. In other words, no man has 
the legal right to provide for the care 
of his lot or the graves of his dead 
after the decease of the owner. Nei- 
ther have they the legal right to pro- 
vide for the keeping in repair of their 
monuments, vaults, and headstones. 
It seems almost impossible that such 
a condition could exist, and special 
enabling legislation is the first ne- 
cessity toward securing a perpetual 
care fund. 
There is a statute that permits 
county cemeteries to receive money 
in trust for this purpose, but most all 
such cemeteries are maintained by 
the counties for the burial of paupers 
only, and if the relatives or friends 
of the latter did not have enough 
money to pay for their burial they 
certainly will not be able to leave 
any for the care of their graves. 
Section 5 of “An Act to protect 
cemeteries and to provide for their 
regulation and management,” ap- 
proved June 39, 1885, purports to au- 
thorize cemeteries to receive proper- 
ty, or the income of such property, 
for the purpose of “improvement, 
maintenance, repair preservation and 
ornamentation” of lots, etc., in cem- 
eteries. This does not in terms au- 
thorize trusts in perpetuity for the 
purposes stated, and as a trust in per- 
petuity for the purposes stated would 
be void unless authorized by statute, 
it may be doubtful, if the question 
were raised, whether the statute as 
it now exists would be held to make 
valid such trust in perpetuity. 
Another very serious objection to 
the law as it now stands, is that the 
provisions of the sections purporting 
to authorize trust funds do not ap- 
pear to come within the title of the 
original act, and that, therefore, these 
amendments which have been tacked 
on from time to time are probably 
unconstitutional and void. The title 
of the original act is “An Act to pro- 
tect cemeteries, and to provide for 
their regulation and management,” 
and the first three sections provide 
against disorder, etc., in cemetery 
grounds, and authorize the board of 
directors of any cemeterj^ society or 
association to make rules for the reg- 
ulation of the grounds and conduct 
of persons therein, and for the ap- 
pointment of policemen to protect 
such cemetery grounds. This seems 
to be all that is embodied in the title 
and what follows these sections relat- 
ing to trust funds, etc., seems to be 
wholly outside of the title to the act, 
and if the question ever was brought 
before the Supreme Court it might be 
held that the provisions relating to 
trusts contained in the sections fol- 
lowing the first referred to are void. 
The bill designed to remedy this 
situation, is known as House Bill 130, 
and has been introduced by Repre- 
sentative Swanson. It reads in full 
as follows: 
A Bill for an Act to amend an Act entitled 
“An Act in relation to the conveyance, use 
and i>reservation of burial lots in ceme- 
teries.” approved April 21, 1S99. in force. 
.July 1, 1899, by adding thereto a new sec- 
tion to be known as Section 2. 
Section 1. Be it enacted by the People of 
the State of Illinois, represented in the Gen- 
eral Assembly: That an Act entitled. “An Act 
in relation to the conveyance, use and pres- 
ervation of burial lots in cemeteries,” ap- 
proved April 21, 1899, in force July 1, 1899^. 
be and the same is hereby amended by add- 
ing thereto the following section, to be 
known as Section 2: 
Sec. 2. That every such company or as- 
sociation incorporated for cemetery purposes 
under any general or special law of the State 
of Illinois may receive, by gift, devise, be- 
quest, or otherwise, moneys or real or per- 
sonal property, or the income or avails of 
such moneys or property, in trust, in perpe- 
tuity, for the perpetual and permanent im- 
provement. maintenance, ornamentation, re- 
pair. care and preservation of any burial lot 
or grave, vault, tomb, or other such struc- 
tures, in any cemetery owned or controlled 
by such cemetery company or association, 
upon such terms and in such manner as may 
be provided by the terms of such gift, devise, 
bequest, or other conveyance of such moneys 
or property in trust and assented to by such 
company or association, and subject to the 
rules and regulations of such company or as- 
sociation, and every such company or as- 
sociation owning or controlling any such 
cemetery may make contracts with the owner 
or owners or legal representatives of any 
lot, grave, vault, tomb, or other such struc- 
ture in such cemetery, for the perpetual and 
permanent improvement, maintenance, orna- 
mentation, care, preservation and repair of 
any such lot, grave, vault, tomb, or other 
structure in such cemetery owned or con- 
trolled by such cemetery company or as- 
sociation. 
Abandoned cemeteries have re- 
ceived some attention from the Legis- 
lature of Indiana in House bill No. 
333, passed by the last legislature of 
that state, which puts the care of 
abandoned cemeteries in the hands of 
township trustees, and requires the 
trustee to keep any such cemetery in 
a respectable condition by fencing 
when there is no fence, by keeping 
the fences in good repair, and keeping 
the weeds mowed,” and to take care of 
all the public cemeteries in the town- 
ship. The act of 1905 with relation 
to the care of public or private ceme- 
teries is repealed. 
In the case of Lounsbury vs. the 
Trustees of Square Lake Burial As- 
sociation, the Supreme Court of 
