45 replies to this topic

[CGM]

Norman,

Was the example photograph in #17 provided by you or the CWGC?

CGM

[seadog]

Hi CGM it is one of my photos of the last resting places of those commemorated on my local church roll of honour. The location is Arnos Vale Cemetery, Bristol posted as an example of what I understand that  the CWGC would describe as a private war grave.

Norman

[CGM]

Thanks Norman, I would agree that this is a private war grave.

Taken from the CWGC website:
First among the Commission's responsibilities is the Commemoration by name of all Commonwealth service men and women who died during the two world wars either on a headstone marking the grave or, if the grave is not known, on a memorial to the missing.

As I read it, so long as the inscription on a private, family grave is adequate as a commemoration, all is well. A problem arises when the words refering to the war casualty buried there are no longer readable.

Private graves are owned by whoever owns the grave (the deeds are made out to them) and neither the owners of the burial ground nor the CWGC / others may alter the grave in any way without the permission of the grave owner.

I would therefore suggest that in these cases, when either the grave has never been marked with a headstone or the name of the casualty is no longer readable, a search for the owner of each grave has been instigated without success, and the list has now been published.

(I have recently arranged for the deeds of my grandparents grave to be transferred to me and now I am able to arrange for the deteriorating inscription to be renewed, but I am not sure that the CWGC would re-do an existing stone - they would add a headstone of their own - when they have permission.)   

CGM

[seadog]

Thanks for the info, You may of course be correct in your assumption that the CWGC appeal concerns those private graves that also commemorate the war dead and on which the details of the fallen are indistinct. However if that is the case then there should be dozens of cemeteries listed not just the relative few on the web site. Indeed if correct my example on post 14 would most definitely qualify. Also are you thinking that the CWGC will repair the damage insofar that the inscriptions are rendered readable if the legal owner of the grave cannot be found to agree to a CWGC headstone being erected, in my view this would seem very unlikely indeed and a complete departure for them which will cost a great deal of money to undertake.

My aim in pursuing this matter is that I believe that this is the first time that such an appeal by the CWGC has been made plus the almost total lack of any detailed information on why the appeal is deemed necessary which is repeated in the brief explanations via email. Hopefully there is a simple explanation to all this but in my view the CWGC are not acting with sufficient transparency as to their motives in making such an appeal.

Regards
Norman

[seadog]

Any further information regarding the CWGC intentions?, IFCP (Diane Post 18) etc.

Regards
Norman

[Phil Wood]

Surely private war graves are those graves in which the deceased was buried at family expense in a plot purchased by the family.  As the CWGC does not commemorate pre-WW1 graves all such graves will be less than 100 years old and, therefore, there should at least be an attempt to contact the family before doing any work on them.

The CWGC commonly do work on such graves.  They do not (as far as I am aware) do any repairs to the orginal gravestones, kerbs or whatever. Instead they add a stone of their own to the grave - sometimes with more consideration than others.  In recent years they appear to be putting Gallipoli markers on the graves, previously they put the standard stones up. This use of Gallipoli markers may be the current norm or it may have been at the choice of the cemetery I have seen six of them in.

Here is one they could have done better: http://westberkshire...rials/WB103.jpg

This one works a little better: http://westberkshire...rials/WB137.jpg

Here is a Gallipoli marker added almost surreptitiously: http://westberkshire....php?gpic=95515

Most of the graves they are seeking the family for will be graves they have known about for decades - they regularly (ie every so many years) inspect such graves and will only seek to add a stone if the original has become illegible.

[RammyLad1]

Norman, perhaps the CWGC are starting to do this with 2014 in sight. I would imagine that extra funding will have been made available for this purpose. There are a few graves in Ramsbottom that have been lain down by the council on health and safety grounds, as they were no longer attended by family members. It is a shame to see them in that state, I wonder if the council had the power to do this would they then be the ones legally responsible for their upkeep, although I ve just probably answered my own question with the fact that they were lain down !
An interesting project.

Duncan

[Keith Roberts]

Councils are responsible for safety in cemeteries that they administer. If they consider a headstone to be at risk of collapse and therefore a potential hazard,  they will take a practical means to make them safe. Unfortunately the most economical means is normally to move a monument int a horizontal position.

Keith

[seadog]

Many thanks for the responses perhaps a member with access to those at the CWGC may be able to glean what exactly they have in mind and let us know. It is worth noting that the CWGC state that there are over 23,000 cemeteries worldwide where the dead are buried of which over half are in the UK so if this is a general work programme they will certainly have their work cut out for years!.

Regards
Norman

[CGM]

Following on from the statement from the CWGC which confirms that a war grave is for those who died from the result of war and not just for those with a CWGC headstone ** (that is - it is the manner of the loss of life rather than the memorial stone on the grave which determines war grave status) I hope the reason behind the appeal from the Commission for relatives of the fallen listed on the website to come forward has become clear.

From"Keeping Names Alive" on the website:

One of the most important aspects of our work is ensuring that the names of all Commonwealth Servicemen and women are legible.  A damaged or eroded panel or headstone, a name that cannot be read is unacceptable, which is why we have a rolling programme of inspections of headstones and memorials.

This is not new, and yes, as you say, I'm sure they have their work cut out for years, but with continuing weathering it is a rolling programme not a finite one.

To summarise:

This does not apply to the gravestones on private graves where a family member who warrants a war grave is commemorated on the gravestone but not buried in the grave.
The CWGC responsibility is for the commemoration where the body lies.

The CWGC inspects all the war graves in the UK.

Where the name is on a private gravestone, and can easily be read, all is well.
Where they see a name on a private gravestone which cannot be read they will take steps to arrange for this to be put right (with the addition of a CWGC stone) or, if there is no stone at all, they will place one of their own there, but they cannot progress without the permission of the grave owners.

Cemeteries have the names and addresses of the original owners of the graves but if the families have not updated these records, as the owners have passed away, attempts to trace the current owners often fail.

The lists on the CWGC website, as I see it, are an extension of previous failed attempts to trace the current owners of these graves.

All within the remit of the CWGC.

CGM

See #69 of this thread

[hywyn]

The link on Post 1 does not work for me. I wanted to have a look at the list og names that other posters mentioned. I have had a look on the News section on the CWGC site but cannot find anything that seems to fit the topic (apart from one for a Pte Topliss I believe)

Was it an 'old' item?

Hywyn

[Keith Roberts]

Try this one - I think the address has changed

http://www.cwgc.org/...ext-of-kin.aspx

EDIT Sorry wrong one!  Maybe it has been removed altogether.

Keith

[seadog]

This latest news item on the CWGC web site seems to confirm that the reason for the original appeal is most likely to have been in order to contact surviving relatives of the dead in so that permission can be given for a CWGC headstone to be erected on what are family grave plots. I also see a connection between this proposal and the CWGC erecting signs at initially 3,000 UK cemeteries which is also on their web site. Good to see however that with the latest item of news at least there is a little more explanation for the rationale, however can they be seriously proposing to extend this to all the private graves in which war dead are buried in UK cemeteries and which at this time do not have a CWGC headstone?.

Link:
http://www.cwgc.org/...of-kin-(1).aspx

Keith, It looks like you are correct and the original NOK news item has gone AWOL. Forgive me for being critical of the CWGC but what are they playing at?.

Regards
Norman

[Keith Roberts]

Norman


they are just getting on with their job, to the best of their ability. All big organisations are constrained by procedures and accountability, and none are free of the possibility of error, but IMHO the CWGC are amongst the best of public servants, delivering a considerable service, under real financial pressure, while seeking to ensure that they take their role forward into a changing world.

They may well make mistakes; it would be amazing if they didn't, but overall the result of their efforts is amazing.

I think that while it is quite proper, and even needful to query some decisions, our enquiries should always respect their intentions, and their commitment.

Sermon over. (Not bad for an atheist). I can however add that when I have raised issues with them, I have always had constructive thoughtful and courteous replies, sometimes within a working day, always within say 10 working days. As an organisation they demonstrate the  public service ethic that we are so fortunate to have in this country's employees at both national and local level.

Keith

[seadog]

Keith, I really do appreciate your detailed reasons for support of the CWGC, perhaps you also will have an opinion on my last post in respect of the missing news item that you will no doubt recall was a comprehensive appeal to NOK of the war dead in a not insignificant number of UK cemeteries to contact them. If this appeal was both important and serious why then has it been removed from their web site? It would be good if this question was addressed instead of touching statements of support for the organization irrespective of what seems to me to be a sometimes less than a acceptable level of service if the subject (s) of this thread are anything to go by.

Norman

[Keith Roberts]

perhaps a rethink?  maybe someone queried the post and it was decided to cancel it.

If so, what is the problem?

Keith

[CGM]

seadog, on 10 August 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

can they be seriously proposing to extend this to all the private graves in which war dead are buried in UK cemeteries and which at this time do not have a CWGC headstone?.

Regards
Norman

No, I think not. Back in #28 amongst other things I wrote As I read it, so long as the inscription on a private, family grave is adequate as a commemoration, all is well. A problem arises when the words refering to the war casualty buried there are no longer readable.

It's probably worth re-reading #31 as well.

I really cannot see anything out of the ordinary about these items of information on the website.

[seadog]

Keith Roberts, on 10 August 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

perhaps a rethink?  maybe someone queried the post and it was decided to cancel it.

If so, what is the problem?

Keith

Keith, had a rethink?, I take it that you had read the news item and noted the long list of names detailed in the hope that any surviving NOK would contact them for reasons which are still not clear but were stated as being the need to do some "work" on the graves listed. Do you not consider that whilst this request was published on their web site it would have been a good idea to have also published this in the appropriate local newspapers in the area of the cemeteries in question given that not everyone has either access to the internet or indeed even if they have, do not as a matter of course visit the CWGC site. They are either serious about the request or they are not in which case the item should still be there or a reason for its removal should have been posted.

Norman

CGM I do not read the latest request this way.

[CGM]

seadog, on 10 August 2012 - 06:42 PM, said:

CGM I do not read the latest request this way.

Why not?

[David Underdown]

Perhaps they have now decided to deal with one cemetery at a time. How do you know they have not approached local media?

None of us can second guess what they are doing. A brief email to say that a web page seems to have gone missing, can it be restored, or alternatively a brief explanation as to why the approach has been changed.

Norman, I must say that the tone of your posts (and emails to CWGC that you have posted on the forum) often comes across to me as rather combative, and sometimes your point gets a bit lost in rather too much detail. I gentler tone, and more focused queries might get more helpful responses (and have less possibility of putting people's backs up).

[David Underdown]

It would appear that under the terms of the The Local Authorities' Cemeteries Order 1977 it's probably up to the burial authority to post notices in the newspapers (and at the cemetery entrance)

I note that this Statutory Instrument (and other similar ones, go to Advanced Search and put "Commonwealth War Graves Commission" in the Keywords in content box, with the quotes) define a 'Commonwealth war burial' as "a burial of any member of the forces of His Majesty fallen in the war of 1914-21 or in the war of 1939-47". In general CWGC has additional rights over such burials not granted to any other group, or any family member