649 
PARK AND CEMETERY. 
Greenwood, Brooklyn, N. Y.; Oak- 
land, St. Paul, Minn., and Newton 
Cemetery, Newton, Mass. 
Thomas Wallis, superintendent 
Rosehill cemetery, Chicago, 111., read 
a paper on “Cemetery Records,” in 
which he gave a description of the 
various card indexes, books, plat rec- 
ords, etc., in use at his cemetery. No 
matter what system is used, he said, 
too much care cannot be taken to in- 
sure accuracy. 
Robert R. Bringhurst, a popular lo- 
cal undertaker and former city treas- 
urer of Philadelphia, addressed the 
meeting informally. He extended 
cordial greetings to the visitors, com- 
mented on local politics, said he noted 
a marked improvement in the condi- 
tion of the cemeteries around Phila- 
delphia, and incidentally wove in some 
good stories. 
New members admitted during the 
meeting were: Harry S. Adams, 
Supt. Forest Hills, Jamaica Plain, 
Mass.; David Casselburg, Supt. Odd 
Fellows, Philadelphia, Pa.; F. D. 
Clark, Supt. Prospect, Toronto, Ont.; 
Bradley Cummings, Supt. Linden, Lin- 
den, N. J. ; J. Thomas Carter, Supt. 
Burial Ridge Cem., Baltimore, Md. ; C. 
J. Gallon, Supt. Beth Israel, Hartford, 
Conn. ; C. T. T. Mason, chairman exec- 
utive committee, Boone, la. ; Miss 
Daisy M. Blaine, Asst. SujDt., Elm- 
wood, Detroit, Mich.; Lewis D. Wil- 
son, Secy-Treas. Arlington Cemetery, 
Camden, N. J.; Charles T. G. Flaher- 
ty, Supt. St. Agnes, Albany, N. Y.; 
Jacob Schwab, Supt. Waldheim, Chi- 
cago, 111.; Benj. Kuykendall, president 
Towanda, Pa.; C. W. Dwyer, supt. 
Mt. Olivet, Dubuque, la.; Edw. A. 
Merriam, Loudon Park, Baltimore, 
Md.; J. M. Stratton, Supt. Mt. Peace, 
Philadelphia, Pa.; Henry Tieman, 
Supt. New Oxford, Pa.; Peter- Olsen, 
Asst. Supt. Oakland, Warren, Pa.; 
Clarence Thornton, Supt. Bethel, Elk- 
tion, Md.; F. J. Merrick, Supt. New- 
ark M. E., Newark, Del. 
Third day, morning session: Ed- 
ward G. Carter, Supt. Oak Woods 
Cemetery, Chicago, who has been ex- 
perimenting with motor trucks in that 
cemetery for some time past, gave the 
results in a carefully prepared paper 
which follows : 
MOTOR TRUCKS IN TIIK CEMETERY. 
By Edward G, Carter. 
A study of the possible use of motor trucks 
for cemetery purposes based on an expe- 
rience of four months’ operation during the 
open season, together with the necessary 
experiments leading up to their adoption, 
suggests the following, confining ourselves 
to the draught problem, without reference 
to passenger traffic. 
Draught service In the cemetery may be 
divided into two general classes of Field- 
work and Road-work and the former may 
be eliminated from present consideration, 
except as it may necessitate the retention of 
horses that might also be used in contin- 
gencies. Road-work covered by this inquiry 
includes that by dump-carts, various wag- 
ons and sleds. These last are probably 
aside from competition by the motors and 
may be placed with the Field equipment. 
The expectation then in the use of mo- 
tors is to do the work in the grounds here- 
tofore done by the carts and wagons and if 
economy is demonstrated in this, it prob- 
ably involves the largest and most expen- 
sive department of vehicle service. It con- 
sists of light and heavy classes, the former 
to include such as may come under bur- 
dens of 1500 pounds, which is the rated 
capacity of the general run of delivery cars 
and the heavy to include the general ceme- 
tery hauling, as sand, etc., with a due re- 
gard for getting into the dumping places. 
It is assumed that the class of light work 
does not in itself offer a sufficient amount 
to warrant the exclusive use of a motor 
and is referred to in order to show the 
need of flexibility in the service. It ap- 
pears necessary that the motor should han- 
dle both the light and heavy teaming, also 
that it should handle any and all of it, 
for the reason that it may not be economi- 
cal to separate the work so as to allow of 
certain classes being done by horse ve- 
hicles, principally because of the expense 
of maintaining two systems for the same 
purpose. 
Let us consider just what this general 
teaming consists of and the methods here- 
tofore employed of handling it. A typical 
load is a dump-cart, drawn by one horse 
and carrying thirty cubic feet, which in 
wet sand will weigh .3600 pounds, with the 
driver and equipment two and one-half 
tons. Another type is the low-wheeled 
handy-wagon of about the same capacity. 
These vehicles travel at the rate of three 
miles per hour, either loaded or empty and 
the average haul is one-half mile. They 
are in service nine hours per day and it has 
been shown that they are moving about 
one-third of the time. This single-horse 
equipment, in addition to driver, represents 
a cost of $1.25 per day. covering invest- 
ment. interest, depreciation, feed, stable- 
labor. insurance, shoeing, veterinary and 
repairs of vehicle and harness. This is for 
300 working days per year. An average for 
the year round represents the equivalent of 
six of these equipments in constant service. 
Two methods were proposed at the out- 
set for handling this work by motors. First 
by a truck of sufficient capacity to carry 
the heaviest of the loads, say two to three 
tons and second, by means of smaller cars 
to make more frequent trips. Neither of 
these methods appeared satisfactory. 
Motor-trucks rated to carry two tons are 
claimed to have a very fair overload mar- 
gin, about 50 per cent or probably safe at 
30 per cent, so that for the purpose of 
first consideration the two-ton truck may 
be taken as the unit. Information as to 
the performance of these trucks is still 
rather indefinite, due to the lack of any 
very wdde experience with them, but some 
of their possibilities may be approximated. 
The prices of the better known cars of this 
size reach close around $3,000.00. The speed 
is designated at fifteen miles per hour. The 
cars generally are not claimed to carry 
greater weight than horse vehicles in the 
same class, but are claimed to move faster 
and farther with the same loads and in 
this consists their economy. From this it 
is seen that their economy increases with 
the length of haul. Short hauls and wait- 
ing are admitted to limit their usefulness 
and the motor people have not much to 
say on short hauls wdth heavy vehicles; 
so that the smaller the car can be held, 
considering the work, the more efficiency 
is to be had. The two-ton cars are all 
very heavy, ponderous, machines, particu- 
larly in length for turning in the compara- 
tively narrow roads of a cemetery and 
everything considered, an experiment with 
this type of car did not appear warranted 
at the time. 
With regard to the second method pro- 
posed, for handling the loads by more fre- 
quent trips of smaller cars: there appears 
to have been a fairly good try-out of the 
delivery car type, rated to carry 1,500 
pounds and the choice in construction, 
make-up and appearance range around 
$2,000.00 in price. This car is regarded as 
having 40 per cent of the capacity of the 
typical load before referred to. This-^ 
means that to accomplish the work of one 
single-cart as before given, it would be 
necessary for the car to make two and 
one-half trips in the same time, or to ac- 
complish the work- of two single-carts the 
car must make five trips in the same time. 
According to speed ratings of fifteen miles 
per hour it would just do this as compared 
with the three-miles-per-hour of the horse. 
And while the relative speed is only one of 
the features of comparison, still it appears 
from all standpoints that the motor service 
applied in this way could not be relied on 
to displace more than the two horses and 
it will be seen that this is not sufficient 
to justify the change: 
It is necessary, for economy, that the 
power shall be applied so as to equal the 
long haul, or in other words that the mo- 
tor shall be kept in nearly constant use. 
This has been done by using it as a trac- 
tor to draw the various loads in the form 
of trailers. 
The car selected is of the delivery type, 
rated at 1,500 pounds carrying capacity, 
with four-cylinder engine, selective trans- 
mission. shaft drive, solid-rubber tires and 
equipped with a special tension draw-bar 
to absorb the shock and jar of starting 
and stopping heavy trailing loads. A plat- 
form body has been found the most con- 
venient. The trailers are the several types 
of horse vehicles before referred to, equipped 
with short poles for pulling. These poles 
should have an eye sufficiently large to per- 
mit of ready coupling, or in other words 
room to go and come, but the space in front 
of the coupling-pin should fit this eye 
snugly so as to prevent lost motion and in 
this way the tension springs will relieve all 
jar. This shock and jar is really the 
menace to this method of hauling, but with 
the precaution described there appears to 
be no effect detrimental to the car or 
loads. It is expected that the trailers now 
in use may not have a very extended ex- 
istence, due to the greater speed and more 
constant service imposed upon them, but 
the expense of replacement with vehicles 
adapted to the purpose will not be ex- 
cessive. 
The trailers are deposited at various 
points as required and loaded in the regu- 
lar course of work. The motor is then 
coupled on and delivers them at the un- 
loading point. The trailers are usually 
taken one at a time when loaded, but 
sometimes, when empty, several are taken 
in train, to be distributed. By this means 
the motor is never idle, but kept moving 
about the grounds and is consequently able 
to do the work of several horses. It is a 
conservative statement to say that it dis- 
places five of the horses handled in the 
manner previously described. The expe- 
rience shows that the motor travels from 
thirty to fifty miles per day at an aver- 
age speed of nine miles per hour, that is 
six to eight miles with load and about 
twelve miles maximum, unloaded. It is, 
of course, capable of higher speed, but 
usage has shown this to be safe on level 
roads with long curves. The capacitj^ for 
pulling easily quadruples the carrying ca- 
pacity of the car and a load of four tons 
is frequently drawn with it. 
As to cost, we are still somewhat de- 
pendent upon the original estimates as there 
has yet been no experience with repairs. 
These estimates were intended to provide a 
safe margin of cost at four dollars per day, 
including investment, interest and depre- 
ciation figured on complete replacement in 
five years, together with fuel, repairs and 
insurance. The car requires a crew of two 
