View report page

37
site from a sanitary aspect, the Order was annulled upon the
owner giving an undertaking that he would sell that site by
the ordinary procedure.
No further practical progress has been made, however, to
provide this parish with a burial ground. After the matter
came before the House of Commons, its solution was left to the
Parish Council, who have as yet settled nothing, and it is evident
that, unless the difficulty is shortly overcome, the District
Council, as guardians of the public health, ought to take steps to
provide the necessary accommodation.
Two other parishes, Beddington and Wellington, are in
much the same position. These two parishes have, up to the
present time, used in common the churchyard in Beddington,
being, as I understand, parts of one ecclesiastical parish, although
they are distinct for rating purposes. The churchyard will
shortly be filled, and some desire has been expressed, especially
on the part of Beddington, to have separate burial grounds in
the future.
The Parish Council of Beddington, with this desire in view,
selected a site near the existing churchyard for their own
new burial ground, but as it could not be obtained by agreement,
the District Council was asked to obtain it by compulsory
purchase.
A report was presented by Mr. Chart and myself in due
course, in which it was advised that on public health grounds
nothing should be done to encourage the provision of two burial
grounds instead of one, and that the site selected by Beddington
was undesirable from both a sanitary and a legal point of view.
Since both parishes are composed mainly of chalk, the difficulty
of finding a site free from objection was enhanced, but it was
indicated that there was land in a suitable position where the
chalk was protected by a thick layer of Thanet sand of a dense
nature.