Funeral Procedure for Home Deaths

[chrisharley9]

Evening All

Trying to get my head around a question that has arisen with regard to deaths in UK hospitals for those in service with the British Army.

What procedure was adopted for returning their bodies to their NOK. Did their families have to pay for a funeral at home?

If anyone can come what the WO policy was for these deaths I would be very grateful

Cheers

Chris

[Moonraker]

Of some but not complete relevance:

previous thread

Moonraker

[Seadog]

I understand from a member of a family whose relative died in a military hospital in the UK from wounds suffered abroad that in this instance there was the option of a military burial in a local cemetery near to the hospital or the family could take the body home and bury him at their own expense, including transportation costs etc which is exactly what this family did.

Link

http://www.flickr.com/photos/glosters/3581391641/in/set-72157603654398542

Norman

[Ice Tiger]

This has come up before.

Unusually I have to agree with Normans post. The military would pay for the soldier/sailor/airman to be buried locally to the hospital or place of death. If the family wanted them buried in their local cemetery then the family had to pay the cost of recovering the body tithe home town and the funeral. One family in Addlestone, Surrey, were unable to pay the costs and local shop keepers raised the money to bring the body back to Addlestome and bury him in the local cemetery- Source Surrey Hearald Newspaper.

[Phil Evans]

I agree with Norman, the cost , including transportation of the body, being at the family's expense. The only incidence of the Military bearing all, or part, of the expense I have found so far, is as in my post #20 in the thread Moonraker has linked to. To date, I have never found a source of the WO documentation outlining the policy.

Looking at the service record of Charles Peers, Cpl 12958, 11th Bn Cheshire Regiment, his relatives appear to have been informed of his death directly by Lewisham Military Hospital and made the arrangements for his return home with them.

Although not directly relevant, from some work I have been doing on Commonwealth men buried in the UK, I am increasingly under the impression that the initial arrangements, at least, were made by the hospitals themselves.

Phil

[Seadog]

Another aspect of this particular discussion to bear in mind is the fact that many relatives chose to bring their loved ones home for burial at no doubt not inconsiderable expense when the military would have arranged burial close to the place of death for free. There could be in my opinion two reasons for the family declining an official burial, firstly and the most obvious is that the loved one would be closer to the family in respect of visiting and tending the grave. The second reason is not so straightforward but could be indicative of the personal feelings of the family towards the war etc. This I believe is supported by the fact that many such graves do not have an official CWGC headstone in addition to the family marker which may or may not substantiate such a view. My example in a previous post is a case in point.

Norman

[chrisharley9]

Thanks everyone for the replies so far

Cheers

Chris

I agree with Norman, the cost , including transportation of the body, being at the family's expense. The only incidence of the Military bearing all, or part, of the expense I have found so far, is as in my post #20 in the thread Moonraker has linked to. To date, I have never found a source of the WO documentation outlining the policy.

Looking at the service record of Charles Peers, Cpl 12958, 11th Bn Cheshire Regiment, his relatives appear to have been informed of his death directly by Lewisham Military Hospital and made the arrangements for his return home with them.

Although not directly relevant, from some work I have been doing on Commonwealth men buried in the UK, I am increasingly under the impression that the initial arrangements, at least, were made by the hospitals themselves.

Phil

Hi Phil

I have an ANZAC buried in a local cemetery who appears to have been returned home for burial so will check his service record for what I can find

Chris

[David_Underdown]

The only case I've seen a payout ws someone who died having returned to civilian work, but was in reserve class W (so far as I remember - he had been allowed to return to his trade) - had his health improved he could have been recalled to the colours. His widow requested £5 towards funeral expenses - he had died in a military hospital (or had at lest been receiving treatment there) in his home town of Chester.

[jon_armstrong]

The second reason is not so straightforward but could be indicative of the personal feelings of the family towards the war etc. This I believe is supported by the fact that many such graves do not have an official CWGC headstone in addition to the family marker which may or may not substantiate such a view. My example in a previous post is a case in point.

I think there are more practical reasons for this...

• most plots would not be wide enough to accommodate two headstones
• many existing family plots would have had an existing headstone with available space already in situ, so there was no need for a new one
• additional family members can be added to a private headstone which cannot to a CWGC one
• many families will have made their own arrangement for a headstone long before the possibility of a government-funded one arose some years later

[Seadog]

But surely the CWGC headstone will be in addition to the family one and most grave plots could accommodate two.

Norman

[centurion]

But surely the CWGC headstone will be in addition to the family one and most grave plots could accommodate two.

Norman

One would think the contrary to be true - where would you put the second - alongside the first original one which will be centred? Or in front which would be ridiculous

[squirrel]

I think there are more practical reasons for this...

• most plots would not be wide enough to accommodate two headstones
• many existing family plots would have had an existing headstone with available space already in situ, so there was no need for a new one
• additional family members can be added to a private headstone which cannot to a CWGC one
• many families will have made their own arrangement for a headstone long before the possibility of a government-funded one arose some years later

Quite agree with this - also with Centurian's point. Most graves are 2'6" x 6' 6" so not much room for a second headstone and if the grave were purchased for more than one interment the second "headstone" would have to be removed and replaced for each subsequent one. Impractical and expensive. Although I have seen a grave with a family and a CWGC headstone and it looked remarkably odd.

[Tunsilk]

I have an example with Husband's CW Gravestone at foot of wifes grave. Both gravestones facing each other.

David

[CGM]

The CWGC remit:

Each of the war dead should be commemorated by name on a headstone or memorial.

When a war grave is marked with a private (family) memorial which adequately commemorates the war casualty there will not be a CWGC headstone.

If the war casualty's name on the private (family) memorial becomes illegible the CWGC will look to add a stone which does commemorate the war casualty.

They will, however, have to attempt to gain permission from the current owner of the grave.

Looking at #12 squirrel wrote ....I have seen a grave with a family and a CWGC headstone.

Am I correct in saying that the family headstone did not commemorate the war casualty, or the name of the war casualty was very difficult to read? In this case the CWGC will be responsible for commemorating the casualty.

I personally have seen a CWGC stone on a grave marked by a family stone which only commemorated the father.

Looking at #13 I have an example with Husband's CW Gravestone at foot of wifes grave.

The CWGC have therefore placed a stone on the grave of a war casualty who was previously not commemorated where he lies.

CGM

[squirrel]

Hello CGM - the grave had the family memorial with only the casualty's name on it, quite legible, and a CWGC stone. It was a WW2 casualty.

I have never seen a CWGC stone on a grave which already has a private memorial in a GWGC cemetery.

[Phil Evans]

William Greenfield at Ladywell Cemetery, Lewisham:

The only difference is that the family headstone has him as 48th Canadian Highlanders and the CWGC as 15th Battalion. I believe the 15th was drawn from the 48th.

Phil

[CGM]

Thank you squirrel and Phil.

Interesting.

CGM

[Seadog]

Thanks for posting the photo Phil, there are of course numerous examples of CWGC headstones on a private grave where a family stone is already in-situ.

Norman

[centurion]

William Greenfield at Ladywell Cemetery, Lewisham:

Greenfield 02.jpg

The only difference is that the family headstone has him as 48th Canadian Highlanders and the CWGC as 15th Battalion. I believe the 15th was drawn from the 48th.

Phil

And the whole thing looks very odd - as if they're trying to pin him down

[Kath]

One would think the contrary to be true - where would you put the second - alongside the first original one which will be centred? Or in front which would be ridiculous

It would be put at the foot of the grave.

Kath.

[Seadog]

Two examples of CWGC headstones erected on private graves where the individual is also commemorated on the family headstone

Norman

Left – WW1

J A McGill

Petty Officer

HMS Vivid

Died 14^th March 1917

Right – WW2

W G Daltry

Royal Air Force

Died 13^th February 1944

[CGM]

I think 2 of the examples where the casualty is commemorated twice (a private and a CWGC stone) show that the family information was not completely accurate - see Greenfield in #16 and McGill in #21.

In my post I wrote When a war grave is marked with a private (family) memorial which adequately commemorates ....

Maybe these inaccuracies mean that the CWGC felt that the family stones do not adequately commemorate the casualties.

I can't tell if the other examples match this suggestion.

CGM

[Seadog]

My understanding is that you are incorrect and the simple fact is that the family was offered a CWGC headstone if the individual was buried in the family grave and that this was not dependent on any description that appeared on the family headstone. Anyway who was to decide on the correctness of the family inscription when the CWGC records themselves are prone to inaccuracies. The fact is that many families made the deliberate choice not to have a CWGC headstone for reasons we can only guess at from this distance in time.

Norman

[Tom Morgan]

I may be wrong, CGM, but I think the CWGC remit you referred to earlier is what the CWGC would say if someone asked for a CWGC stone to be placed on a private war grave today because, for example, the original private headstone was beginning to deteriorate. They would say that if the grave is still adequately marked so that it can be identified and located, there is no need for a CWGC stone.

At the time, back in the day, I don't think relatives were asked whether they wanted a CWGC stone or a private one. They were asked a simpler question - whether they wanted a CWGC stone or not. Whether or not they had already marked the grave privately was immaterial, I believe. I think this is why we see so many graves with private and CWGC markers - because the families decided to have both.

Tom

Edit at 13.46: sorry for appearing to repeat Seadog's comments. His post appeared while I was writing mine.

[Seadog]

Worth remembering that the CWGC can do nothing without the approval of the family who own the grave, this is why they, the CWGC have been recently requesting families to contact them in respect of certain cemeteries here in the UK. Members will have their own examples but here is an extreme case of no visible commemoration whatsoever and as no doubt the family no longer exists this is how it will remain. Important to mention of course that he will appear on the CWGC Debt of Honour register so in that respect he is not forgotten.

Flickr photo

http://www.flickr.com/photos/glosters/5745577711/in/set-72157626647032057

Norman