On Thursday, 3 December 2015 20:05:04 UTC, Wendy Archer via wrote: > On 03/12/2015 19:36, Tim Powys-Lybbe via wrote: > > > > Curiously there are none of the funny expressions in either of these > > URLs. And they work here at least. > > Thank you, Tim. How mysterious! > > May you enjoy the remaining windows! > > Wendy I suspect that these symbols have appeared because you are posting to Rootsweb GenBrit without using plain text. I got blocked from GentBrit for doing so. This was just after I had moved to a US based email manager (maybe without changing the necessary settings). Simple answer - either change those settings, or always use plain text (which is a nonsense for anyone who communicates socially - a little bit like cutting out your tongue), or remember to switch back whenever you post outside Rootsweb (stitch the tongue back on), or use a 'newsgroup' (as in Google groups) which forces you into plain text. Of course, a lot easier if Rootsweb ceased operation and were replaced by a modern mailing system! Chris

On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 10:36:47 +0000, johnfhhgen via <genbrit@rootsweb.com> wrote: >On 01/12/2015 2:42 PM, Richard Smith via wrote: >> On 01/12/15 10:36, johnfhhgen via wrote: >> >>> They *are* human remains: this recent judgement gives a good summary of >>> the law in the matter - >>> >>> http://www.ecclesiasticallawassociation.org.uk/index.php/judgmentlist/exhumation/astwoodcemetery/download >> That's ecclesiastical law which is quite different and doesn't apply >> outside churches, burial grounds, and similar. No-one is doubting you >> need permission to disturb a burial ground. >> Richard >> >I am sorry I did not make myself very clear. I was not doubting the need >for permission to disturb burials, but questioning your statement - > >" That's bollocks: you can't possibly be prosecuted for illegal disposal >of human remains for the simple reason that ashes are not considered >human remains." > >The judgment makes clear that both in secular and ecclesiastical law >(the latter, incidentally, being part of the secular law of Engand and >Wales), cremated remains are considered human remains. > They are human remains as they are all that is left from a human but after cremation they are no longer a body or human tissue or controlled waste, just ash so just another form of litter if disposed of improperly.

Various archive collections put out advent calendars at this time of year. Not all the windows relate to family history, but they're fun, and maybe give ideas about types of collections worth exploring. Both Aberystwyth and Sheffield have some good calendars this year. http://www.aber.ac.uk/…/collect…/special-collections/advent/ http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/libra…/special/adventcalendar2015 Wendy

On 01/12/2015 2:42 PM, Richard Smith via wrote: > On 01/12/15 10:36, johnfhhgen via wrote: > >> They *are* human remains: this recent judgement gives a good summary of >> the law in the matter - >> >> http://www.ecclesiasticallawassociation.org.uk/index.php/judgmentlist/exhumation/astwoodcemetery/download > That's ecclesiastical law which is quite different and doesn't apply > outside churches, burial grounds, and similar. No-one is doubting you > need permission to disturb a burial ground. > Richard > I am sorry I did not make myself very clear. I was not doubting the need for permission to disturb burials, but questioning your statement - " That's bollocks: you can't possibly be prosecuted for illegal disposal of human remains for the simple reason that ashes are not considered human remains." The judgment makes clear that both in secular and ecclesiastical law (the latter, incidentally, being part of the secular law of Engand and Wales), cremated remains are considered human remains. Regards, John Henley

On Tue, 01 Dec 2015 14:42:18 +0000, Richard Smith <richard@ex-parrot.com> wrote: >On 01/12/15 10:36, johnfhhgen via wrote: > >> They *are* human remains: this recent judgement gives a good summary of >> the law in the matter - >> >> http://www.ecclesiasticallawassociation.org.uk/index.php/judgmentlist/exhumation/astwoodcemetery/download > >That's ecclesiastical law which is quite different and doesn't apply >outside churches, burial grounds, and similar. No-one is doubting you >need permission to disturb a burial ground. > "Human remains" in that context do not define (if there actually is a definition) "human remains" in the many other available contexts. Ashes which have been passed on from a crematorium are in general just ashes for parties other than the family members involved. Once a human body has been cremated or otherwise "converted" (or a part separated from a body) it is no longer a human body; this was established in recent years in English Law in two (or more?) cases involving theft (R v. Kelly and Another [http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/R-v-Kelly-1999.php]) and/or claimed improper use of body parts which maintained the principle that there was no property in a human cadaver but there was in anything later produced from it as that product was no longer a human body.

Thanks Veronica, Am on the right path now to "the source" who has offered to actually check at Devon Heritage Centre (in January) as it does seem there might be a communication problem, however the 'offer' only concerned 2 names, "Tucker" and "Mortimer".. Regds Di On Monday, 23 November 2015 00:58:40 UTC+11, Veronica I Barr via wrote: > Why not go to the source(s) - it will give them the opportunity to review > their information and add/delete as needed. > > -----Original Message----- > From: genbrit-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:genbrit-bounces@rootsweb.com] On > Behalf Of Di via > Sent: Thursday, 19 November, 2015 1:56 PM > To: genbrit@rootsweb.com > Subject: Wrong info. on FindMyPast site? -Devon Wills Index > > Using info on Devon Wills Index on FindMyPast suggesting Devon Heritage > Centre could have beneficiary names for (Mortimer)wills having the ref. 'CA' > (College of Arms) I got the reply from Local Studies Assistant,Devon > Heritage Centre that the info here for 'CA' > http://www.findmypast.co.uk/articles/devon-wills-index---available-sources > was not correct, that ' The index we hold only contains three pieces of > information for each entry: the year, the folio number, and the name. There > is no mention of the names of beneficiaries as indicated on Find My Past.' > > Communication problem here ? > >

On 01/12/15 10:36, johnfhhgen via wrote: > They *are* human remains: this recent judgement gives a good summary of > the law in the matter - > > http://www.ecclesiasticallawassociation.org.uk/index.php/judgmentlist/exhumation/astwoodcemetery/download That's ecclesiastical law which is quite different and doesn't apply outside churches, burial grounds, and similar. No-one is doubting you need permission to disturb a burial ground. Richard

On 01/12/15 09:24, Gordon wrote: > Even the shoreline is defined by either the high water mark or low water > mark or something similar, I don't recall exactly how it is defined. It's defined as the high water line. See, for example, the Finance Act 1986, §108. Richard

On 29/11/2015 1:10 AM, Richard Smith via wrote: > On 28/11/15 12:06, Gordon wrote: > >> To scatter ashes you must have the land owners permission otherwise >> you could be prosecuted for illegal disposal of human remains, > That's bollocks: you can't possibly be prosecuted for illegal disposal > of human remains for the simple reason that ashes are not considered > human remains. You could perhaps be prosecuted for littering or > similar, or conceivably criminal damage (though the circumstances would > have to be extraordinary to make that sticking). > Richard They *are* human remains: this recent judgement gives a good summary of the law in the matter - http://www.ecclesiasticallawassociation.org.uk/index.php/judgmentlist/exhumation/astwoodcemetery/download Regards, John Henley

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message news:$0DE9WR+NMXWFw+K@soft255.demon.co.uk... > > >Who is the landowner in places like, say, Beachy Head? Every square inch of the UK is owned by some one or some organisation/company or local authority or even the "Crown". The ownership may be obscure but there will be an owner "hidden away" somewhere. The easiest way to find out will be the Land Registry, if they don't know then I don't know who ownership defaults to. Even the shoreline is defined by either the high water mark or low water mark or something similar, I don't recall exactly how it is defined. Gordon

On 12/1/2015 2:36 AM, johnfhhgen via wrote: > On 29/11/2015 1:10 AM, Richard Smith via wrote: >> On 28/11/15 12:06, Gordon wrote: >> >>> To scatter ashes you must have the land owners permission otherwise >>> you could be prosecuted for illegal disposal of human remains, >> That's bollocks: you can't possibly be prosecuted for illegal disposal >> of human remains for the simple reason that ashes are not considered >> human remains. You could perhaps be prosecuted for littering or >> similar, or conceivably criminal damage (though the circumstances would >> have to be extraordinary to make that sticking). >> Richard > They *are* human remains: this recent judgement gives a good summary of > the law in the matter - > > http://www.ecclesiasticallawassociation.org.uk/index.php/judgmentlist/exhumation/astwoodcemetery/download > > > Regards, > John Henley > In fact, isn't it possible to conduct limited post-mortem tests on cremains? For instance detection of certain poisons. It is a mistake to refer to ashes, in fact cremains are mainly ground up bone. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 21:48:29 +0000, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: >On 30/11/2015 21:45, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: >> In message <dc36srFqarmU1@mid.individual.net>, Richard Smith >> <richard@ex-parrot.com> writes: >>> On 30/11/15 10:16, Gordon wrote: >>> >>>> If I recall correctly it mentions requiring land owners permission >>>> before >>>> scattering or burial outside a cemetery or churchyard. >>> >>> Well, yes. Obviously. Technically you need the land owner's >>> permission to do almost anything. But ashes are no different to >>> anything else, and they're certainly not "human remains" if you're >>> scattering them as a private individual. The only relevant offences I >>> can see that might have been committed is the offence of leaving >>> litter under section 87 of the Environment Protection Act (1990), and >>> that would be dependent on a court finding that the ashes constituted >>> litter in those particular circumstances. If you scattered them on >>> Centre Court at Wimbledon, a court may well find you guilty; if you >>> scattered them on a secluded mountainside, there's almost no chance. >>> In this, it's no different from throwing away an apple core. >>> >>> Richard >> >> Who is the landowner in places like, say, Beachy Head? > The head or the foreshore below ? Around 50% of foreshore belongs to the Crown Estate :- http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/estates-map/ >Eastbourne Borough Council in that case. Quite a lot of the more scenic >parts of the coastline are owned by the National Trust.

On 30/11/2015 21:45, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > In message <dc36srFqarmU1@mid.individual.net>, Richard Smith > <richard@ex-parrot.com> writes: >> On 30/11/15 10:16, Gordon wrote: >> >>> If I recall correctly it mentions requiring land owners permission >>> before >>> scattering or burial outside a cemetery or churchyard. >> >> Well, yes. Obviously. Technically you need the land owner's >> permission to do almost anything. But ashes are no different to >> anything else, and they're certainly not "human remains" if you're >> scattering them as a private individual. The only relevant offences I >> can see that might have been committed is the offence of leaving >> litter under section 87 of the Environment Protection Act (1990), and >> that would be dependent on a court finding that the ashes constituted >> litter in those particular circumstances. If you scattered them on >> Centre Court at Wimbledon, a court may well find you guilty; if you >> scattered them on a secluded mountainside, there's almost no chance. >> In this, it's no different from throwing away an apple core. >> >> Richard > > Who is the landowner in places like, say, Beachy Head? Eastbourne Borough Council in that case. Quite a lot of the more scenic parts of the coastline are owned by the National Trust. -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail.

In message <dc36srFqarmU1@mid.individual.net>, Richard Smith <richard@ex-parrot.com> writes: >On 30/11/15 10:16, Gordon wrote: > >> If I recall correctly it mentions requiring land owners permission before >> scattering or burial outside a cemetery or churchyard. > >Well, yes. Obviously. Technically you need the land owner's >permission to do almost anything. But ashes are no different to >anything else, and they're certainly not "human remains" if you're >scattering them as a private individual. The only relevant offences I >can see that might have been committed is the offence of leaving litter >under section 87 of the Environment Protection Act (1990), and that >would be dependent on a court finding that the ashes constituted litter >in those particular circumstances. If you scattered them on Centre >Court at Wimbledon, a court may well find you guilty; if you scattered >them on a secluded mountainside, there's almost no chance. In this, >it's no different from throwing away an apple core. > >Richard Who is the landowner in places like, say, Beachy Head? -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Chuck Berry was once asked what he thought of Elvis Presley and he said, "He got what he wanted, but he lost what he had." [Quoted by Anne Widdicombe, in Radio Times 8-14 October 2011.]

>> On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 14:09:33 +0000, nick ashby via >> <genbrit@rootsweb.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi I am correct,that a person can be buried anywhere in the UK,in a >>> cemetery different to the place of death. >>> >> They can be buried, cremated or exported anywhere but are you actually >> thinking of the general right to be buried in the local parish >> cemetery (if there is one) in England ? >> referred to in :- >> http://www.funeralinspirations.co.uk/information/Traditional-Burial.html >> >> A body cannot be removed from England and Wales without permission of >> the Coroner but that is generally a matter of getting the right form, >> informally called an "out of England" form/certificate (Form 104 >> Removal Notice). Cremated remains are not a "body" and there are for >> most practical purposes no special restrictions on their disposal. >> > > Years ago we used to get a lot of parcels sent up to work from London by > Red Star because it was far quicker and more reliable than any of the > courier companies so we were often at the local station. > > I went one time to collect something and went around the back of the > parcel office so I could take it straight through the back door. > > There was large coffin sized box covered in canvas in the parcel office, > I asked about it and was told that they were known as 'single-enders' > because they obviously were only going one way. > > > > - Thank you,for replies Distant relative born Watford Herts,died and death registered in Bristol.Buried in Watford Herts Nick

On 30/11/15 10:16, Gordon wrote: > If I recall correctly it mentions requiring land owners permission before > scattering or burial outside a cemetery or churchyard. Well, yes. Obviously. Technically you need the land owner's permission to do almost anything. But ashes are no different to anything else, and they're certainly not "human remains" if you're scattering them as a private individual. The only relevant offences I can see that might have been committed is the offence of leaving litter under section 87 of the Environment Protection Act (1990), and that would be dependent on a court finding that the ashes constituted litter in those particular circumstances. If you scattered them on Centre Court at Wimbledon, a court may well find you guilty; if you scattered them on a secluded mountainside, there's almost no chance. In this, it's no different from throwing away an apple core. Richard

"cecilia" wrote in message news:nmlm5bp4i7dvc1q40lv1lph4dts52q5u7b@4ax.com... > > >If I recollect correctly, the piece of paper is for passing on to >those in charge of a cemetery or churchyard if the ashes are to be >disposed of in such a place. I don't remember any instructions if the >ashes are being disposed of elsewhere than a cemetery or churchyard, >e.g. in one's own garden. If I recall correctly it mentions requiring land owners permission before scattering or burial outside a cemetery or churchyard. Gordon

On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:42:04 -0000, "Gordon" <gordonwb@argonet.co.uk> wrote: >{...] Ashes are still human remains and >unauthorised scattering can be view as illegal disposal. Ask an undertaker >or read the paper placed in the urn by the crematorium. If I recollect correctly, the piece of paper is for passing on to those in charge of a cemetery or churchyard if the ashes are to be disposed of in such a place. I don't remember any instructions if the ashes are being disposed of elsewhere than a cemetery or churchyard, e.g. in one's own garden.

On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:55:34 -0000, "Gordon" <gordonwb@argonet.co.uk> wrote: >" Charles Ellson" wrote in message >news:ahhk5bdte45s2reei3bho3759cdds2mejf@4ax.com... >> >>Not for my mother it didn't, ITYF the sealed coffin is a requirement >>if flown on a passenger aircraft and then maybe only because of the >>requirements in the receiving country and/or the airline. Even the >>bodies of persons entering/leaving the UK who have died of particular >>diseases have only the restriction that the coffin must not be opened >>without the permission of the Port/Airport Medical Officer or the >>local Medical Officer of Health :- >>http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/inchpmanual/inchp06550.htm >> >The airline I worked for did carry bodies in the freight bay of passenger >aircraft. The "sealing" would be to prevent leakage (however unlikely) of >decay fluids which would prove corrosive to the aircraft structure plus the >obvious unpleasant side. The seal could be an external plastic sheet which >would be removed before the coffin is returned to relatives. The coffin >would also be wrapped to protect it from damage. > With modern materials that is now probably sufficient for the majority of cases. As can be seen on various television series dealing with undertakers, some countries require what is effectively either a hermetically sealed inner liner or a temporary coffin/container of similar character.

On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:42:04 -0000, "Gordon" <gordonwb@argonet.co.uk> wrote: >"Richard Smith" wrote in message news:dbv1jqFpavqU1@mid.individual.net... >> >>On 28/11/15 12:06, Gordon wrote: >> >>> To scatter ashes you must have the land owners permission otherwise >>> you could be prosecuted for illegal disposal of human remains, >> >>That's bollocks: you can't possibly be prosecuted for illegal disposal >>of human remains for the simple reason that ashes are not considered >>human remains. You could perhaps be prosecuted for littering or similar, >>or conceivably criminal damage (though the circumstances would have to be >>extraordinary to make that sticking). >> >>Richard > >That shows how little you know. Ashes are still human remains and >unauthorised scattering can be view as illegal disposal. Ask an undertaker >or read the paper placed in the urn by the crematorium. > Undertakers are businesses which are subject to more stringent requirements on the disposal of waste than a private person; a private person in possession of cremated remains is subject to no more requirements than if they are any other type of domestic waste. Unauthorised scattering commits no more offence than scattering other inert litter; this assumes that such a person is in proper possession of such remains.