Advice has been received from Medser, Dunedin, that Rifleman Lancelot Douglas Miller, a discharged soldier, died at the Dunedin Hospital on Thursday, February 20th. He was thirty years of age, and single, his next-of-kin being his brother, William James Miller. Orchard Leigh, Main road, Green Island. -NZ Times, 22/2/1919.
MILITARY funeral.
The Friends of the late 26/593 Rifleman LANCELOT DOUGLAS MILLER (and Family) are respectfully invited to attend his Funeral, which will leave the Dunedin Hospital (Cumberland street entrance), THIS DAY (SATURDAY), the 22nd inst., at 1 p.m., for the Anderson's Bay Cemetery.
HOPE & KINASTON, Undertakers, 56 St. Andrew street. -Otago Daily Times, 22/2/1919.
The remains of the late Rifleman Lancelot Douglas Miller, who died in the Hospital on Wednesday, were accorded a military burial at the Anderson's Bay Cemetery on Saturday afternoon. Captain McCormack represented the local military authorities, and the firing party was supplied by the Returned Soldiers' Association. The Rev. Mr R. R. Sutherland conducted the service at the grave. The deceased soldier was the youngest son of the late Mr J. C. and Mrs Annie Miller, of Tomahawk. -Otago Daily Times, 24/2/1919.
A MILITARY FUNERAL. TO THE EDITOR.
Sir, — In your issue of the 24th inst you published a reference to the funeral of the late Rifleman Miller, a returned soldier, who died in the Dunedin Hospital last week, and who was accorded a military funeral last Saturday. I should like to know who was responsible for the military arrangements. I saw no Defence representative; there was no firing party; no bugler sounded "The Last Post." Had it not been for the presence of a band there would have been very little of the military character about the funeral.— I am, etc., Interested. Dunedin, February 25.
[We understand that the Defence Department undertakes to supply a military representative and a gun carriage in the case of military funerals, but does not undertake to supply a firing party. This is usually provided by the Returned Soldiers' Association. In this case the association was communicated with immediately the department was notified of Rifleman Miller's death, and undertook, if possible, to supply the firing party. About an hour and a-half before the time arranged for the funeral to leave the Hospital a communication was received from the association stating that on account of the unsuitable hour it could not provide a firing party. A representative of the Defence Department — Captain McCormack — was present at the funeral. — Ed. O.D.T.] -Otago Daily Times, 27/2/1919.
TO THE EDITOR.
Sir, — If the Defence authorities knew one hour and a-half before the time of starting of the funeral of the late Rifleman L. D. Miller, that no firing party could be procured, why did they not, for decency's sake, acquaint the relatives of the fact? Instead, the cortege was kept waiting at the Hospital for the firing party to turn up, till the Defence Department's own representative (Captain McCormack) had to telephone headquarters, to find out that no firing party was available. Rifleman Miller went into camp on October, 1915, and returned home in January, 1919. He had over three years' military service, was wounded and gassed, twice, and returned home practically in a dying condition. Surely the Defence authorities could at least show some little respect for his memory. They were acquainted three days ahead with the time arranged for the funeral and it met with their approval. I should like to ask if it is not a fact that only one firm of undertakers in Dunedin is recognised by the Defence Department, although no effort is made by it to let relatives know until other arrangements are made and it is too late to fall in with its plans, and whether this had not something to do with the poor showing of the authorities at the late, rifleman's funeral?
— I am, etc, One Who Would Like to Know. February 27. -Otago Daily Times, 1/3/1919.
A MILITARY FUNERAL. TO THE EDITOR.
Sir, — With reference to the funeral of. the late Rifleman L. D. Miller I take it as an insult to myself and all his relatives if it is to be taken as an example of the way the military authorities are going to act in future with the lads who have done their duty and returned home to die. Is it true that one firm of undertakers has the monopoly of the burial of returned soldiers? Why should not the relatives be at liberty to choose their own undertaker, leaving the military honours to be arranged for by the Defence Department? The authorities should be compelled to ignore distinctions, or the fathers and brothers of those lads who have done their "bit" will demand satisfaction — equal honours for the privates and the officers. I was advised by the Returned Soldiers' Association and the Defence Department that a proper military funeral would be arranged; but what was the result? No firing party was present, as we were led to expect Why was this arrangement carried out? Both the Returned Soldiers' Association and the Defence Department were notified three days beforehand, and so had plenty of time to arrange everything satisfactorily. Was this neglect because the Miller family chose their own undertaker
— I am, etc, D. Miller. Dunedin, March 3.
[We are informed that the Defence Department has a contract with a firm of undertakers, but there is nothing to prevent the relatives of deceased soldiers from entering into any private arrangement they may choose, for the employment of undertakers. As has previously been explained, the absence of a firing party on the occasion of the funeral which is the subject of this correspondence was due to the fact that intimation by the Returned Soldiers' Association of its inability to supply a party was not received by the department until it was too late for it to make the necessary arrangements. — Ed. O.D.T.] -Otago Daily Times, 5/3/1919.
A MILITARY FUNERAL. TO THE EDITOR.
Sir, — My attention has teen drawn to a letter regarding the funeral of the late Rifleman W. D. Miller, which appeared in your issue of even date. In this letter and the footnote attached to it, statements are made from which the general public may assume an entirely erroneous view of the case Mr Miller's statement that he was told by the Returned Soldiers' Association that "a proper military funeral would be arranged" is not in accordance with fact. He may have been told so by the Defence Department, but I certainly made no such statement, and I do not know of any member of the Association who did so. I may state that this association has nothing whatever to do with the arrangements for a military funeral beyond finding, when practicable, firing parties and pall-bearers. In this case the association was requested to find these parties, and it was agreed to comply with the request if found possible, but I then pointed out that, as the hour at which the funeral was to leave (1 p.m.) was particularly awkward for men who were working on Saturday morning, it would be extremely doubtful as to whether a party could be found. The Defence Department was notified early on that morning that this association could not supply the party. Whenever requested by the Defence Department to do so, this association does its utmost to provide firing parties and pall-bearers for the funerals of returned soldiers; but in view of all the circumstances I fail to see how this association can be saddled with the responsibility for the non-appearance of these parties at the late Rifleman Miller's funeral.
— l am, etc., Geo. M. Skits, Secretary, Dunedin Returned Soldiers' Association. Dunedin, March 5. -Otago Daily Times, 7/3/1919.
Lancelot Miller's lungs gave him trouble through his Army service. His record shows treatment for chronic bronchitis and admission to hospital at the end of 1918 with pleurisy.
No comments:
Post a Comment