Red Cross Way Southwark London

[teresaevans]

Hi Ruskie

I had heard about the cold case programme but never did manage to find it online so thank you for this info and the other information that you provide.

I am searching for information about building works conducted around 1928/29 as a book published reveals a letter of complaint from a guy known as Mr. Magenis. He made a complaint to the South London Press about buildings being erected in the burial ground now known as Cross Bones. He was obviously aware that the Disused Burial Grounds Act 1884 prevented building when he was a child. It remains the case now, despite an amendment to this Act being enforced in 1981. The two Acts are read as one Act. No exhumation licence can be issued under either of these Act’s. An exhumation licence can only be issued under one of the Burial Acts and in these circumstances only when works have been conducted before. I aim to prove that the works that were conducted in 1928/29 was unlawful, and that decisions made at this time to issue an exhumation licence was equally unlawful which has had an effect on decision making since.

I am aware that when the sub station was built in the burial ground to serve the Jubilee Line extension, archaeologists found foundations which were recent and believed they were once foundations for warehouses.

There is already a campaign running to save part of the burial ground and turn it into a garden/open space. This is led by a man known as John Constable. Without him I would never have known that a burial ground existed on the corner of the street that I lived in. You may care to sign the petition http://www.crossbones.org.uk/#/petition-contact/4530753744

I support the Cross Bone campaigners, but I am not convinced that relying solely on ethical and moral considerations is enough to secure a decision not to build on part of the burial ground. I also believe that all of the burial ground should be protected and an open space created, just as was done in many DBG’s back in the 19th Century.

Thank you for your words of encouragement.

[teresaevans]

Hi Valda,

In response to your posting I point you to my response to Ruskie. It is my understanding that anyone wishing to build in a disused burial ground would need to have obtained legislation that overrides these Act’s. To my knowledge no such legislation exists.

The schools that Isabella Homes refers to were built before the Disused Burial Grounds Act 1884 came into force. The St. Saviour’s Charity school for boys was built in 1791 and the National Free School for girls was built in 1819. I am not certain when both were demolished, but a school on the opposite side of the road also known as St. Saviour’s replaced these schools.

You appear to have some knowledge of the law in relation to burial. Should you feel inclined to do so I would be grateful if you would examine the Disused Burial Grounds Act’s which are read as one, and let me know if you arrive at the same opinions as me.

Kind regards

Teresa

[Valda]

Hi


English Heritage document taken from the appendices

e.g.

'The Church of England has powers similar to those in the Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment) Act 1981 to overcome the prohibition in the Disused Burial Grounds Act 1884 in relation to building in churchyards and in land belonging to a parish church or cathedral.'

and

'If any human remains are to be left in-situ on a site where development is to take place, care is needed in order that the procedure complies with relevant legislation. The Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment) Act 1981 stipulates that there should be prior removal of human remains before a building is erected on a disused burial ground. However, if the planned works will leave human remains undisturbed, then dispensation can be obtained from the Home Office authorising that the burials remain in situ'.

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/human-remains-excavated-from-christian-burial-grounds-in-england/16602humanremains1.pdf


An example of a notice to build under the Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment) Act 1981

http://www.caerleon.net/history/records/castlest/burials/swa.html


'The Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment) Act 1981 gives authority to other churches and religious bodies to utilise their disused burial grounds for the erection of buildings, provided that either no interments have ever taken place there or, if there have been burials within the previous 50 years, the descendants of the deceased persons do not object.  As with s.11 of the OSA 1906 and the Planning Regulations 1950 (paragraphs 25 and 26 above), public notice by way of advertisement is required and disinterred remains must be decently reinterred.'

National Association of Local Councils 2007.


The excavations in the 1990s would have been following the legislation of the Disused Burial Ground (Amendment) Act 1981. The burial ground itself was shut in 1853 so the issue of interments over the last 50 years does not apply.

The 1981 Amendment Act itself

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/18/contents

most important section would be

Exclusion of Disused Burial Grounds Act 1884 in certain cases.

Basically the 1884 act is not applying to church ground where interments have never taken place or

'no personal representative or relative of any deceased person whose remains have been interred in such land during the period of fifty years immediately before the proposal to erect a building thereon has in accordance with subsection (2) of this section duly objected to the proposal or all such objections have been withdrawn.'



Regards

Valda

[Ruskie]

Thank you for answering my questions Teresa. Valda, you have provided some very interesting information - some of which I admit to not understanding fully  - but I am going to go over it again more carefully.

I would like to see as much of this burial ground that still remains preserved. Not for ethical or moral reasons, but as I see it, for historical reasons, and to preserve links to the past.

Valda you said that Southwark Council refused planning permission to build office blocks on the site in 2002, but the decison was overturned. Am I right in assuming that they are in favour of keeping this as an open space?  Who is pushing for this development?

[Ruskie]

I've signed the online petition - I'm sure many more rootschatters would also sign if they knew about it.

Valda, is there any way you can ask if we can have a link to this petition via the "News:" at the top of the page under the rootschat header (beside Trystan's Christie appeal)? 

[teresaevans]

It is my understanding that planning permission was denied as the design (height of buildings) did not meet with the heritage sites which are closely situated. Transport for London made an appeal and won. It is Transport for London pushing for a new development as land is surplus to requirements.

I have complained to the planning authorities. It appears that when they are making decisions they make them only on planning legislation and not other legislation that may prevent building in a disused burial ground. The Planning Inspectorate when making a decision on the appeal took into consideration that the land had been built on before. But it does not mean that any building which took place in or around 1928 was done so lawfully.

I would implore anyone with knowledge of law related to burial and disused burial ground Act's to clarify if my understanding is correct and that new legislation would be required to overturn the DBGA’s for a private developer to go ahead.

[Valda]

Hi
 

Legally authorities cannot just take into consideration planning legislation when dealing with building on a burial ground. They have to take into consideration the 1857 Burial Act (for what needs to happen concerning the bodies - if any are moved that can only be done with a licence issue by the Secretary of State - there are some concerns now over archaelogists keeping some remains and reburials not taking place) and the Disused Burial Grounds Act 1884, but more crucially the amendment to that Act in 1981 which basically 'pushed a cart and horses' through the 1884 Act.
Some of the 148 skeltons removed in the 1990s from 'Cross Bones' were exhibited at the London Museum's 1998 London Bodies exhibition.


The Planning inspectorate should take into consideration the type of development that could go ahead within the boundaries of the planning legislation (I don't think they are in a position to rule on specific legislation that governs burial grounds) as they would do for all planning development appeals.

The Planning Inspectorate

'In 99% of appeal cases the decision is taken by the Inspector; in others the Inspector will prepare a report and make a recommendation to the Secretary of State'

http://www.planning-inspectorate.gov.uk/pins/index.htm



1981 Disused Burial Grounds Amendment Act

'Exclusion of Disused Burial Grounds Act 1884 in certain cases..

(1)Notwithstanding section 3 of the principal Act (which prohibits the erection of buildings on disused burial grounds except in certain cases) but subject to section 2 of this Act a building may be erected on a disused burial ground or part thereof which is or has been owned by or on behalf of a church or other religious body provided that either—.

(a)no interments have ever taken place in such land, or.

(b)no personal representative or relative of any deceased person whose remains have been interred in such land during the period of fifty years immediately before the proposal to erect a building thereon has in accordance with subsection (2) of this section duly objected to the proposal or all such objections have been withdrawn..

(2)Notice of any proposal to erect a building on land in which human remains are interred shall be given by or on behalf of the church or other religious body by whom or on whose behalf the land is held by—.

(a)advertisement in two successive weeks in one or more newspapers circulating in the area where such land is situated, and.

(b)notice displayed on or near such land.
specifying the time (not being less than six weeks from the date of the first publication of the newspaper advertisement) within which and the manner in which objections thereto can be made.



Nothing there about any previous buildings on the grounds and most burial grounds being built on today and since 1981 will not have had any previous buildings on them. Cross Bones remaining land has already had the London Underground electricity sub-station for the Jubilee Line Extension built on it in the 1990s. This appears to have been perfectly legal and the requirements of the burial acts were followed.
There are other burial grounds that are being lost across the country. They may not be so well known but their supporters and descendants would equally say they also deserve similar attention particularly where gravestones are being lost and destroyed.
Historically, certainly in urban areas the loss of burial grounds is not a new development.


Short video on London's Lost Burial Grounds

http://www.youtube.com/user/crossboneskatie


Image of present day Cross bones

http://spitalfieldslife.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/img_8065.jpg

No matter what it looks like today and like other London burial grounds it could be returned to a 'green area', the real issue that threatens the burial ground is that it is potentially a very expensive piece of real estate.


Many urban churchyards were at least in part saved and have become important green areas for London in particular. At the time of their closure in the early 1850s most central London churchyards were awful places which is why there was a popular movement to clear them.

'It appears almost impossible to dig a grave in this ground without coming into contact with some recent interment, and the grave digger's pick is often forced through the lid of a coffin when least expected, from which so dreadful an effluvium is emitted, as to occasion immediate annoyance; most of the graves are very shallow, - some entire coffins, indeed, are to be found within a foot and a half of the surface.'


By 1895 Isabella Holmes for the London County Council had found the location of nearly 500 burial grounds, churchyards and civic cemeteries in the city and suburbs of London, of which 364 still existed at least in part, 90 of which were public gardens. In 1895 only 41, largely civic cemeteries were still in use. The county of London in 1895 was around 119 square miles in size and Isabella didn’t count in her list any just beyond its boundaries. Greater London formed in 1965 is just over 300 square miles in size.



Financial Times article on Cross bones which indicates Southwark Council's position in 2008.

http://crossofstgeorge.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=22883


The Cross Bones website

http://www.crossbones.org.uk/



Regards

Valda

[teresaevans]

Hi Valda

I appreciate that we may each interpret Act’s of Parliament in different ways. I don’t agree that the 1981 Amendment Act pushed a cart through the 1884 Act.

Yes you are correct that in general circumstances exhumations can only take place with an exhumation licence issued by the Ministry of Justice. It would be issued under Section 25 of The Burial Act 1857.

If my understanding of the law is correct a private owner of a disused burial ground can only extend or build a place of worship etc. (1884 Act) and to exhume bodies
would have to apply for “directions of the Secretary of State” (Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment) Act 1981, schedule Section 2 paragraph 7). Obviously no place of worship has been extended and ‘directions’ have not been sought. Exhumation licences have been issued instead on several occasions.

It is likely possible that the sub station built in the 1990’s was built under different legislation which allows ‘statutory undertakers’ to build in a disused burial ground. An exhumation licence was issued under the 1857 Act. This is quite a separate issue to what legislation if any, was relied on to conduct building in or around 1928, and what could be relied on now. I am not aware whether an exhumation licence was issued in 1928 or if ‘direction’s were sought from the secretary of State. This I need to determine. I am aware that the land owner in 1898 sought ‘directions’ and was refused.

Historically, certainly in urban areas the loss of burial grounds is not a new development.

No it is not unusual. There is some case details available which indicates that not all loss of burial grounds was done lawfully, and has been legally challenged in some instances.

I think one of the biggest problems in respect of the Cross Bones burial ground is that many people simply believe what they are told and accept that what building has been done in the past or intended for the future must be lawful. Just as people accept that Cross Bones is one in the same burial ground that John Stow wrote about in his Survey of London. There is no real evidence to support this. I am not alone with this thought. Gillian Tindall author of ‘The House by the Thames and The People Who Lived There’ expresses the same view.

Thank you for the links that you have provided.


 

[Ruskie]

When decisons are to be made involving development worth millions of pounds, I don't necessarily trust those decision makers.   

The thing about that valuable piece of land, is that it has sat there empty for years, and now that there is some interest shown in it's preservation after the remains were found, then it seems that suddenly it is going to be 'developed'.
Just an outsiders impression ....

[Valda, as an aside, a few years ago I read a fascinating and easy to read book about burials/graveyards in London, but I can't for the life of me remember what it's called. I'm sure it was a fairly recent publication and a good introduction to the subject, and I think a must-read for anyone with London ancestors. Can you please suggest a couple of possible titles as I'm sure I'll recognise it when I hear it. Thanks.  ]