PARK AND CEMETERY. 
277 
“Xo arbitrar\- rule can be laid down es- 
tablishing what is a reasonable expenditure 
for a monument. Each case depends for 
its determination upon its own peculiar 
conditions. * * * \ few of the large 
number of cases on this subject showing 
the attitude of the courts may be referred 
to with profit. In matter of Mount, 3 
Redf. 9, the amount of the estate was 
$983.30, and a charge of $78 for a grave- 
stone was cut down to $50. In Miller vs. 
Morton. 89 Hun, 574, 35 N. Y. Supp. .294, 
it was held that $1,400 for a monument 
was too expensive for an estate of $3,540. 
In matter of Beach. 1 Misc. Rep. 27, 22 
X. Y. Supp. 1079, the court said that an 
estate of $8,000 justified an expenditure of 
$400 for a monument. In matter of Mount, 
3 Redf. 9, it was held that a charge of $700 
for a buri^ lot and monument is excessive 
where the estate amounted to less than 
$2,800. In Owens vs. Bloomer, 14 Hun, 
296, the court considered an expenditure 
of $500 for a monument extravagant, the 
estate not exceeding $8,000. In Burnett vs. 
Xoble, 5 Redf. 69, the personal estate be- 
ing less than $2,000, an allowance of $700 
was refused and reduced to $250. 
‘‘The provision now under consideration 
does not, in my opinion, in terms require 
that all of the balance shall be expended 
for funeral expenses and the erection of a 
monument, and I believe that the intent of 
the testatri.x was that so much of the bal- 
ance as would be reasonable, having in 
mind her station in life and the amount of 
her estate, should be used to defray the 
funeral expenses and to pay for a monu- 
ment.” 
The opinion does not fix the precise 
amount which should be expended in this 
case for a monument, leaving the matter 
largely to the discretion of the executor, 
after considering the fact that decedent’s 
habits were frugal and simple. The judge 
suggests that the kind of monument she 
erected over her husband’s grave would 
be a fair test as to what would be a suit- 
able monument for her. 
Assessment of Cemetery Lands for 
Sewers. 
The Missouri Supreme Court, on a third 
appeal in the case of Mullins vs. Mt. St. 
Mary’s Cemetery Association, 187 South- 
western Reporter, 1 169, and by a final 
order in the case, holds that cemetery 
property may be assessed for a municipal 
sewer improvement constructed in a dis- 
trict in which the cemetery is situated. 
The most important parts of the opinion 
read as follows : 
"There is no eviflence in the case to 
show that sewers are not beneficial in the 
sanitation of this cemetery. In the ab- 
sence of a showing to the contrary, we 
must presume that the common council 
was fully informed on that subject, and 
acted properly in accordance with that in- 
formation. The evidence does show that 
the sewers for the construction of which 
the ta.x bills were issued serve to carry 
away the surface water from the cemetery. 
“Appellant claims that the cemetery 
might have been made into a sewer district 
by itself, so as to relieve it of the burden 
of construction of the lateral sewers. True, 
it might have been done, but there is no 
reason appearing why it should have been 
done. * * * We have seen that the law 
has, through all the past, discouraged the 
location of cemeteries in populous districts. 
* * * There is no sound reason why 
the cemetery should be relieved of its 
share of the burden of getting rid of a 
condition, caused to some extent by its 
presence there. * * * By carrying out 
the work of sanitation, the cemetery may 
become more and more a comfort and an 
ornament to the community, and that com- 
munity may become a more attractive 
framework for the cemetery. 
“There is another fact in the case which 
deserves consideration. The tax bills against 
the land of the defendant seem very large. 
ASKED AND 
Cemetery Advertising. 
Editor Asked and Answered : The 
Cemetery Association has decided to adver- 
tise. but we feel that to do so successfully 
we should know what has been done along 
similar lines. Any information you may 
have as to what other associations or cem- 
etery companies ha\e done, their methods 
of advertising, etc., would certainly be ap- 
preciated. 
Park and Cemetery has printed a num- 
ber of articles presenting concrete evidence 
that all forms of local advertising have 
been successfully used by modern ceme- 
teries. The last one, appearing in .August 
of this year, offers suggestions particularly 
on advertising for lot sales. Individual 
cemetery advertising campaigns of much 
interest were described in these pages in 
the following issues; January and Eebru- 
ary, 1908; March, April and November, 
1910, and .September, 1911. 
The modern lawn plan cemetery has 
many things that may be judiciously told 
the public. Legitimate subjects on which 
people may be educated to the advantage 
of the cemetery are: Natural beauty and 
landscape art in improving the grounds; 
convenience and permanence of location ; 
adaptability of the site; care given to the 
grounds, and the advisability of securing a 
lot before it is needed. The preparing of 
the advertising matter is delicate and ex- 
acting work, and too great care cannot be 
taken to avoid offense to the sentimental 
side of humanity. It is not a task for the 
hammer-and-tongs ad man with his ag- 
That is caused by the fact that there are 
thirty-five acres of land in the cemetery. 
The ‘area rule’ is firmly grounded in our 
law. The common council has no choice 
in the matter e.xcept to ta.x the cemetery in 
proportion to its area, or relieve it alto- 
gether.” 
The last point decided in the case is 
that a cemetery company, being for the 
purpose of assessment for sewer construc- 
tion, owner of all the land in the cemetery, 
notwithstanding the fact that matiy of the 
lots have been sold for burial purposes, 
issuance of the special tax bills against the 
cemetery as an entirety is valid. 
Rights of Creditors of New Jersey 
Cemeteries. 
Under the general laws of New Jersey 
relating to cemeteries, creditors of a ceme- 
tery company have no right to vote at an 
election of trustees, according to a decision 
of the New Jersey Court of Errors and 
Appeals handed down in the case of 
Eoynge vs. Erank, S8 Atlantic Reporter, 
456. 
ANSWERED 
gressive salesmanship. The cemetery ad- 
vertiser must be an artist in the handling 
of words ; he must have a fine appreciation 
of the public’s feelings and be able skill- 
fully to suggest his points. Every word 
and every picture should contribute to a 
pleasant impression. A horrible example 
of the way not to do it was seen in an 
advertisement of a monument dealer who 
proclaimed that stones from his shop would 
“put rings around death.” 
Even a legitimate line of argument may 
easily be too roughly handled. A new 
cemetery in Philadelphia had undertaken 
to do billboard advertising along a trolley 
line in the suburbs. Two of the headings 
read : “Do not wait till the crepe is on the 
door to buy your l)urial lot !’’ and “The 
sheriff can never attach a lot in Cem- 
etery !” 
Cemetery Literature. 
Editor .Asked and .Answered : Will you 
please give me the following information 
or tell me where it can be obtained : The 
titles and publishers of the best liooks on 
cemetery design. /Nrticles on cemetery de- 
sign, layout of burial sections in modern 
cemeteries, burial lots, cemetery planting, 
and, in fact, any information that might 
be utilized in planning and landscaping a 
new cemetery. T should very much like to 
get hold of some plans of cemeteries 
which arc considered good by the land- 
scai)e fraternity. Where, in the eastern 
United .States, particularly in the Atlantic 
coast states, can I find the best examples 
of properly planned aiul administered 
An exchange of experience on practical matters by our readers. You 
are intuited to contribute questions and ansnxers in this department 
