PARK AND CEMETERY. 
247 
CEMETERY NOTES. 
Continued from page 244 
Owners of lots in the city cemetery of 
Shreveport, La., are urged by Commis- 
sioner John McCullough, of the Depart- 
ment of Public Utilities, to cut the grass 
and otherwise improve the appearance of 
lots that have been neglected. He calls 
attention to a city ordinance adopted in 
1907 making it a violation of the law to 
allow an unsightly appearance of cemetery 
lots and providing a fine ranging from $10 
to $25 for violation. 
A report of an audit made of the affairs 
of the Oak Ridge Cemetery, Springfield, 
111., by the Chicago auditing firm of Shep- 
hard & Chandler, filed with Mayor 
Schnepp, criticises the bookkeeping system 
of the board and points out that the ex- 
penses for the fiscal year ending February 
28, 1914, exceeded the receipts by $4,166.87. 
The total receipts for the fiscal year were 
$19,931.09 and the expenses $23,079.96. The 
report points out that the board had no 
right to expend money belonging to the 
cemetery board in advance of the receipts 
or incur any debts on account of the cem- 
etery without the consent of the city coun- 
cil. In their report the auditing company 
declare that their men were unable to find 
the origin of a fund amounting to $16,- 
731.52, which was called “Surplus, March 
1, 1913.” In the perpetual lot owners’ 
fund the report finds that the income ex- 
ceeds the expenses by $306.05 and that the 
surplus has been carried to the investment 
fund to be used in part for the purchase 
of new investments for the account of the 
general investment funds. The city com- 
mission, in session with the Oak Ridge 
Cemetery Board, later absolved the board 
of any neglect or indiscretion in the con- 
duct of its affairs, and instructed Commis- 
sioner Payton to request Shepherd & 
Chandler, of Chicago, to correct some of 
its statements. The cemetery board sub- 
mitted to the council a written summary 
of its affairs and its methods of doing 
business, from which we quote as follows : 
1. While admitting that the expenditures during 
the last, fiscal year exceeded the income, we deny 
that any law or rule was violated. 
It is not uncommon in any business that in 
some years no profit is made; sometimes even losses 
are sustained. During the fiscal year ending 
February 28, 1014, the accounts of which are under 
consideration, improvements were made such as 
building cement gutters; rebuilding a sewer, which 
had caved in, at considerable expense; also buying 
additional ground for cemetery purposes; besides 
buying back a number of lots, all of which caused 
the expenditure to exceed the income during this 
period, while on the other hand, the sale of lots 
and other income were less than usual. 
But we emphatically deny all this difference 
was made good from any surplus. At no time in 
the history of Oak Ridge cemetery was there any 
fund which was denominated a “surplus.” The 
amount on hand at the close of each fiscal year 
was always treated as “balance on hand” and were 
the savings of former years. 
Furthermore, we desire to say that the board 
never exceeded its powers as provided by ordinance 
in creating a debt without having sufficient funds 
on hand to meet all obligations. 
2. The comments made by the auditors as to 
the management of the Lot Owners’ Perpetual Care 
and Improvement fund are not at all justified, as 
the conclusions arrived at are based on the wrong 
premises. 
One of the criticisms of the auditors was that a 
special fund should have been created for the ex- 
cess of revenue over the expenses for care of thes* 
lots. 
An ordinance is quoted by the auditors of the 
year 1902, which has not been in force since 1908, 
when a new ordinance was passed by the city coun- 
cil providing for the management of this special 
fund. 
As provided by this ordinance all funds are kept 
collectively and invested in such securities as stip- 
ulated in said ordinance; no provision is made there- 
in to create a special fund from the excess of 
revenue over the expenses; and we see no reason why 
a special sinking fund should be created, when in 
fact the lot owners perpetual care and improve- 
ment fund in its entirety is a sinking fund, which 
is not expected to be withdrawn. Only the income 
can be used for the care of the respective lots. 
As to the manner of keeping the accounts and 
records of this fund, we desire to say that a regu- 
lar record book is kept in the office of the city clerk, 
wherein the deposit of each and every donor is 
properly recorded, and at the end of each fiscal year 
the expenses of the respective lots are charged 
against the account of such lots, thus showing every 
year how much money was expended on each and 
every lot. 
In addition to this record, a regular cash book is 
kept by the president in which the collective receipts 
and disbursements of this fund are properly entered. 
In this connection we may be permitted, and par- 
doned to mention that the general fund of the 
cemetery has increased in the past five years from 
$0,799.46 to $15,956.19, besides having expended 
large sums of money for additional lands purchased 
and extensive improvements made during this period 
all of wffiich was paid for when acquired or when 
such improvements were finished and accepted by 
the board. 
Respectfully submitted, B. A. Lange, Presi- 
dent; James W. Patton; Howard K. Weber; Jos. P. 
Lindley, August Striffler. 
FOR SIXTEEN YEARS 
We have been making the best Lowering Device in the 
world, and many BOMGARDNER Lowering Devices, made by us 
in 1899 and 1900, arc still in daily use. Lowering Devices, freaks and other- 
wise, come and go, but the BOMGARDNER is here to stay, because every- 
thing about it, including the principle, is right. 
We make only Lowering Devices, Mausoleum Elevators, etc., and our reputa- 
tion is behind everything we make. Every single article is regarded as holding 
our enviable reputation, to make or break it. 
BOMGARDNER MANUFACTURING CO., Cleveland 
