No exceptions to the rules

Having read your article Graveside Heartache", I feel I must reply in defence of groundsman responsible for St Peter s Burial Ground.

Having read your article "Graveside Heartache", I feel I must reply in defence of groundsman responsible for St Peter's Burial Ground.If the families concerned were to look around the churchyard, they would see that the last grave to have a full length kerbed surround was in 1973 and since then the diocesan have ruled that headstones only are to be allowed, to facilitate the mowing of the grass.A lot of churchyards have removed existing kerbstones to the graveyard boundaries, as has St John's at Exmouth, so that it is possible for the sexton to maintain the ground in a tidy condition in the time allowed.It is selfish to expect to use the grave space as a private little garden to the detriment of all the other families who visit their family graves and like to see the graveyard looking tidy and cared for, as St Peter's most certainly is. The groundsman is obviously dedicated to his job and takes a pride in his work and should be praised and commended not vilified.Perhaps if the Journal had bothered to contact the groundsman to hear his side of the story, there would not have been the need for the sensational headlines.It would be impossible to keep the burial ground tidy if every family did as these two families expect to do - there can be no exceptions to the rule.Name and address withheld.


You may also want to watch:


Become a Supporter

This newspaper has been a central part of community life for many years. Our industry faces testing times, which is why we're asking for your support. Every contribution will help us continue to produce local journalism that makes a measurable difference to our community.

Become a Supporter
Comments powered by Disqus