Grave photos for bereaved

The intention of the Government is to present to the next-of-kin a photograph not only of each grave, but a general view, or views, of the particular cemetery. In 30 cemeteries now completed there are probably 3500 New Zealand graves, and this means more than this number of photographs because for every relative there will be an uncoloured photograph of the grave, as well as at least one picture of the cemetery. Each picture, in three-colour block work, is made in England from the original sketch, and several London firms are now thus engaged. To Sir James Allen is due the thought that this touching tribute should be paid to the next-of-kin, to whom it is felt the possession of the picture will be a great blessing and consolation. No pains have been spared in carrying out the idea. Each coloured picture is simply and suitably mounted, and bears the name of the cemetery. 

Each set to be sent out to the New Zealand Government for distribution will contain also the negative of the grave. On the left-hand corner of the envelope will be written the name and regiment of the soldier.

DCC v Ford Motor Co

The Ford Motor Company was charged, before Mr J.R. Bartholomew SM at the City Police Court yesterday, with, on September 22, having obstructed a public highway, to wit, Hope street, by leaving thereon six motor cars. Mr J.B. Callan appeared for the defendant and Sub-inspector Fraser prosecuted. The Sub-inspector said that there had been quite a number of complaints about the company obstructing the road. Constable Miller said that about 1.20pm on September 22 he saw eight motor cars in Hope street, standing against the footpath. They were backed against the path, and were causing an obstruction. Constable Parkhill said that he interviewed one of the company’s staff, who told him that two of the cars were the property of the company, and the others belonged to private owners, and had been brought there for repairs. Witness had seen as many as 15 cars in Hope street, each car taking up a space of about four yards from the kerb. Mr Callan objected to the prosecution having been laid under this particular bylaw, which applied more to street barricades, etc. Whatever applied, it was the collection of cars to which the police took exception. The police charged the company with permitting an obstruction, only two of the cars having belonged to the company. How could a business man be held responsible in respect to the parking of another man’s car. If there were a case of negligently obstructing Hope street the charge should have been brought under section 834. The Magistrate: "Then a wheelwright can place his goods on the street." Mr Callan: "But only two of the cars belonged to the company." After hearing evidence by James Thomas Dunn, an employee of the company, the Magistrate said that it had been proved definitely that the company had been extending its business on to the road. A garage owner had no more right than had a wheelwright or a furniture dealer to store his stock-in-trade on the public road. This was something amounting to a considerable nuisance. The company had had a splendid display of cars down the roadway. It was high time the practice was stopped, as every firm would be trading in the same way. He would take into consideration the fact that the practice was about to be discontinued, and would impose a fine of 40 shillings and costs (7s).

— ODT, 23.10.1924 (Compiled by Peter Dowden)