|
DISPOSAL OF THE DEAD |
|
part II |
|
BY |
|
FREDERICK WALTER LOWNDES |
|
SURGEON OT THE LIVERPOOL POLICE |
|
|
|
The preceding paper on disposal of the dead
considers this subject from the point of view of those who see
difficulties and dangers in the customary method of interment. This view
is in no way universally shared, and it is urged on the other side that,
if proper care be exercised in the selection of the site of the
burial-ground and in its subsequent management, these difficulties and
dangers can be obviated. The destruction of the body by fire gives
opportunity for the concealment of crime, from which interment is free. |
|
Under these circumstances, it is desirable
that the volume should contain a more detailed account of burial in the
earth as a means of disposal of the dead, and of the conditions which
should be observed in the management of burial-grounds. |
|
The practice of burial in the earth as
a means of disposal of the dead has been put upon its defence by two
such eminent surgeons as Sir Henry Thompson and Sir Spencer Wells, who
have succeeded in winning to their side a considerable number of
followers. They have condemned burial in toto, as in every
respect bad, polluting the earth, the air, and the water-supply,
propagating diseases by the bacilli arising from the buried corpses and
as being altogether indefensible. Mr Seymour Haden and Dr Vivian Poore,
two other distinguished members of the medical profession, have taken up
the defence of burial, and have also a large following. They have
condemned cremation as absolutely as their opponents have condemned
burial, alleging that the crematory furnace are much more likely to
poison the air than burial in the earth; that cremation is not a perfect
process, since it leaves a not inconsiderable weight of ashes as a
residuum, and, which is the greatest objection of all, that cremation,
by removing all possibility of exhuming the body, has a direct tendency
to defeat the administration of justice, and to encourage criminals in
their guilt course. Following at a most respectful distance such eminent
men, our course must continue to be, as it has been throughout the whole
of the controversy, a middle one. In both modes we can see merits and
demerits, while in the arguments used by the respective champions on
either side we can see errors. Our principal reason for taking any part
in the discussion is the experience we have gained of burial, in
witnessing the removal of portions of five burial-grounds, one of which
we shall describe, with the exhumations of hundreds of corpses (speaking
quite without compass), and subsequently of four bodies for medico-legal
purposes. Moreover, the city of Liverpool is distinctly one where the
burial of the dead acquires a special interest. |
|
Bounded on the west by the river Mersey, it
has spread north, south, and east with a rapidity which is almost, if
not quite unique. From being a poor fishing village at the commencement
of Lord Macaulay's 'History,' with a population of 4,000, and having
only one chapel-of-ease, whose churchyard was the only burial-ground,
its population rose in the century following to 40,000; while at the
present time it is rapidly approaching 600,000. Many intramural
churchyards, after being filled to repletion, and some even beyond this,
have long since been closed; country churchyards, though considerably
increased, are yearly becoming less capable of meeting the demands made upon their space: while six extramural cemeteries, varying in extent
from fifteen to 120 acres, present appearances of occupation with the
dead buried in them which give rise to serious doubts as to whether they
will suffice for the present generation. It is true that land could be
obtained north, south and eastwards at the distance of some miles from
the city; but land is required for the living rather than the dead. And
we are perfectly satisfied that before ratepayers will consent to the
purchase of large portions of land, bought at a fancy price, they will
insist upon the burial of the dead in the future being conducted on
reformed principles, with an entire absence of any undue monopoly of the
ground by individual purchasers. Moreover, as cremation grows in favour
with at least a section of the public, it will be imperative for some
burial boards to provide facilities for this mode of disposal of the
body in some cemeteries. It is not, however, with cremation but with
burial that we have to deal, and we pass on to describe some of the
abuses of burial, as we have witnessed them, side by side with burial as
it ought to be. For in this, as in other matters, there has been always
in this country a tendency to reform - an assertion of sturdy British
common-sense which has generally been ready to pioneer the way towards
rectifying abuses and supplying in their stead judicious changes. |
|
In 1869 we witnessed the removal of a large
portion of St Ann's Churchyard, Liverpool. This church had been built in
1772 on a morass somewhat difficult of approach and quite extramural to
Liverpool as it then was. Rapidly it was surrounded by houses, which
were at first tenanted by the wealthy citizens, next by the tradespeople,
and, after being divided into several different parts, they gradually
passed into the "slums." For a period of sixteen years before the
removal of the churchyard there had been no interments; but from its
opening in 1772 until its closure in 1853
by Order in Council, a considerable number of bodies had been buried,
comprising individuals of all classes above the rank of paupers, who
were buried elsewhere. Many of hem must have died from infectious
diseases, there having been two severe epidemics of cholera during its
eighty-one years of usage, and other epidemics of typhus, small-pox, &c,
and yet, though the neighbouring houses were mostly separated from the
churchyard wall by a very narrow street, and on one side they actually
touched the wall itself, the health of the inhabitants was not worse
than that of the residents in any other "slummy" locality. However,
there were no reports of any illness caused by the exhumations, which
lasted for some months; and though, of course, steps were taken to limit
the number of onlookers to a select few, nothing could be done to
prevent the inhabitants from crowding round the gate, trying to see what
they could, and watching the departure of the carts containing the
coffins. The majority were taken to Anfield Cemetery, the cemetery
proper of Liverpool, which contains 120 acres, tow-thirds of which have
been laid out for burials, and in which a very large number of human
remainds were re-interred in 1864. The
bodies of some individuals were removed by their friends to other burial
grounds. During the whole of the exhumations the health of the men did
not suffer, though they complained very much of the effluvia at times,
which was most offensive. One accident occurred, resulting in a slight
scalp would, from a falling plank, but this was the only one. During
these months we had time an opportunities to notice the following
interesting facts. |
|
In some parts the ground was very dry, and
here the bodies were found reduced to skeletons, there being no trace of
grave-clothes nor of coffin, except the metal handles, plate, &c. We
have already mentioned that there had been no interments for sixteen
years; hence it will be seen how long the skeleton will remain even in a
dry soil. There had evidently been no lead used in these cases; but
wooden coffins will remain intact much longer than is generally
believed, and we are convinced that it was not until some years after
burial that the body was permitted to come in contact with the earth. We
see here, however, that the soft parts will disappear in time in a dry
soil, leaving only the skeleton, which no doubt will itself disappear in
the course of years. |
|
Small bones, evidently those of newly-born
infants, were found buried very superficially and in more or less
perfect preservation - another fact showing that the disintegration of
the bony skeleton is a work of time. In one case we found a skull with
the calvaria neatly sawn through, evidently from a post-mortem
examination. In another a very perfect specimen of thyroid cartilage was
found. In many instances skeletons were found one lying above the other
with earth in all the cavities, and only a very thin layer of earth
between. There were many opportunities of observing the differences of
sex, as shown by the pelvis and the great stature indicated by the
length of some of the bones. |
|
Very different was the sight presented by
the vaults and bricked graves. Their construction was good, better
indeed than that of many houses for the living. But this superior
construction was a source of danger, since it permitted the retention of
water, with which some of them were almost filled. When this was
removed, the coffins were seen piled, one over the other, the lower ones
crushed almost out of shape by the superimposed weight, and the small
vacant space covered with the debris of the outer cases - oak or
elm boards covered with what had been black cloth or velvet now a mass
of sodden, tattered rags. The lead had in many instances given way at
the soldering over the lid of the inner coffin. When this was intact it
was not disturbed; but when moved it was evident that the contents were
a mass of liquids and solids only partly decomposed, and the effluvia
was sickening in the extreme. Fortunately, the space in which the men
worked was ample, and, as only a small portion was done at a time, the
danger was minimised. In those cases where the inner shell had given way
the sight was extremely repulsive. The contrast between the
decomposition as it takes place when the body is brought into contact
with the earth, as has been described, and when it is tightly boxed up
in a coffin which has for years been soldered up in lead, is very much
to the condemnation of the latter. This is distinctly a subject of
interest and importance to medical officers of health. That a
comparatively thin layer of suitable earth is a perfect deodorizer of
the effluvia arising from a corpse has been and can be proved beyond all
doubt. What is much more to be dreaded is the concentrated gas retained
in the inner coffin gradually oozing through minute apertures in the
solder of the lead-chinks in the outer case and cracks in the cement
into the open air. That it may seriously affect the health of
those attending a funeral or passing through a churchyard or cemetery
seems to us to be undeniable. |
|
But there is another aspect of this mode of
burial which deserves the most serious consideration. All the bodies
exhumed from this churchyard were reinterred exactly in the same manner
in the cemetery to which they were removed - those taken from graves
being buries in graves: those taken from vaults and bricked graves being
placed in similar structures specially prepared for them. A very serious
principle is here involved. the churchyard was attached to a district
church of the parish of Liverpool; the cemetery was purchased by the
ratepayers. These bodies had, with their imperishable coffins, vaults,
and walled graves, occupied the ground in the churchyard for periods
varying from sixteen to eighty years. They were then removed to the city
cemetery, not only to occupy, but to encumber the ground for an
indefinite period. It is no answer to urge that compensation has been
given in the form of an increased sum for the purchase of the vault or
walled grave. No amount of money could recoup the ratepayers for such
perpetual monopoly of the ground paid for out of the rates; while, if in
addition to this such form of burial be, as we contend it is, dangerous
to the living, there can be no justification of it whatever. We are not
going to suggest that the bodies should have been removed from the lead
coffins, and that these latter should have been destroyed; such would be
an outrage. But these exhumations of bodies entombed in lead and placed
in vaults many years ago are occurring with painful frequency in London
and elsewhere. While we write, preparations are being made for the
removal of some two hundred bodies, almost all buried in this same way,
from a churchyard in the very heart of Liverpool to a suburban cemetery.
Similar proceedings are taking place with respect to bodies entombed
below churches in the City of London during the last century and the
early part of this. In other words, those cemeteries which were rendered
necessary by the wholesale closing of intramural burial-grounds in 1853,
and which were purchased at an enormous cost, have to receive the
remains of a past generation; even of those who died a century ago! And
another very serious question arises. will these cemeteries be any more
inviolate than the consecrated churchyards - 'the God's acres' - of the
past? IF these latter may be bought by city corporations for the purpose
of widening a thoroughfare, making a new street, or any other
improvement, and if the dead can be removed to a cemetery, why should
not this be repeated years hence in the case of the cemetery? For every
suburban cemetery forms at once the nucleus of a suburb, village, r
town, and it is quite impossible for them to remain suburban long. Will
railways be allowed to pass through them? And will local authorities be
permitted to acquire this, that, or some other portion for local
improvements, the dead being removed to some other distant cemeteries?
The prospect is not a pleasing one, and we allude to it only to show
what we must press for if burial is to continue as the more general mode
of disposal of the dead. It is burial in the earth pure and simple,
forbidding the slightest deviation from this, and requiring the use of
readily perishable coffins. In this there is nothing which can be called
exacting if unreasonable. The law, as laid down by Lord Stowell more
than half a century ago, is that every parishioner has a right to be
buried in his parish churchyard or cemetery, but that he had no right to
have buried with him a huge trunk or chest, descending with him into a
grave and remaining till its own decay. That is no part of his right,
which, strictly taken, is that his body shall be carried to its parent
earth for dissolution, and that it shall be carried thither in a decent
and inoffensive manner. |
|
That this legal dictum
exactly accords with the sanitary science of the present day must be
obvious to all who are engaged in matters relating to health. The Order
in Council which virtually prohibited intramural burial after the year
1853 was rendered absolutely necessary by the overcrowded condition of
the church- and chapel-yards; the mode of burial in former years having
been that known as 'pit burial.' Bodies were buried in layers ranging
from six to twenty, a similar number being buried over them with a very
slight layer of earth, and the process was repeated until the last layer
was within a very short distance from the level of the churchyard.
Bodies buried like this were exhumed from the old parish churchyard of
St Peter's Church and removed to Anfield Cemetery, the superintendent of
which informed us that the bones were so thickly clustered together as
to resemble sticks in a bundle. This would not have been had the soil
been suitable and had a reasonable portion of it been allotted to each
body; since in that case there would have been only traces of bones,
many of the bodies having buried more than a century and a half. There
experiences of the past teach us to avoid the two pernicious extremes of
burial - (1) hermetical sealing of the body, as in lead coffins and
cemented vaults; (2) overcrowding of bodies together without a
sufficiency of earth for each, as in the pit burial of paupers, a
practice which is not wholly extinct. The happy medium, burial in a
perishable coffin and in a sufficiency of suitable earth, has been found
a perfect mode of disposing of the body in the past; it ought to be our
guide for the future. |
|
It is refreshing to turn from these sights
to our extramural cemeteries of the present day, which have been
purchased and laid out with due regard to suitability of site, of soil,
and other requirements of the times, and the surroundings of each
cemetery. We may judge the capacity of the earth for receiving the
bodies of the dead in the future by a glance at the past. Throughout the
length and breadth of the United Kingdom there are hundreds of village
churchyards in which the dead have been buried for centuries, yet there
is still room for more, and they are still used. In the near vicinity of
Liverpool are the churchyards of Walton, Childwall, and Sefton. The
first received the dead from Liverpool as well as those from its own
vicinity till the seventeenth century, and, although enlarged, there is
still room in the ancient part. Sefton Churchyard has been in use since
the twelfth century, and Childwall since the fourteenth. In them have
been buried the bodies of victims of the plague, the cholera, smallpox,
and fevers of all kinds. Were there any truth in the supposed dangers
from the bacilli arising from these bodies, these burial-grounds ought
long ago to have been noted as foci of disease, whereas their localities
are all models of health. For a long time the burials were comparatively
few, and up till the middle of last century were probably for the most
part of the simplest character. Indeed, in the times when the 'black
plague,' Sudor Anglicanus, or 'sweating sickness,' as it was variously
called, was epidemic, coffins were dispensed with altogether, and so
also in epidemics of small-pox and cholera. We thus see, side by side as
it were, burial as it should be and as it should not be. The evils of
disposing of the dead are shown by the description we have given were
caused by the the short-sighted policy of the former generations, who
persisted in these urban burials, though they saw the town extending all
round them, ignoring the excellent example of the Jews of old who buried
their dead outside the city; and consequent upon this want of foresight
acre after acre of ground was taken, was filled to, and even beyond
repletion, being then closed because it was absolutely necessary. In
addition to the churchyards we have named, there were between thirty and
forty other church- and chapel-yards, and three parish cemeteries, in
all of which were every one of the abuses we have indicated; vault
interment, over-crowded graves (for there was no foot of earth between
each coffin in those days), ground unsuitable for burial purposes, pit
burial - in short, every insanitary condition. |
|
Now, although, as we have already observed,
the mere fact of the dead being buried even in large numbers in any
particular spot, assuming that they are all properly buried, is not
prejudicial to the health of those living near, there can be no doubt
that the intramural burials were a great aggravation of Asiatic cholera,
of which Liverpool had visitations in 1834, 1849, and 1866. In the first
of these years, the deaths from cholera were 1,523 in a population of
230,000; in 1849 they numbered 5,231, the population being then 376,000.
Four years later came the Order in Council which closed absolutely most
of the town burial-grounds, and placed great restrictions upon all the
others; this was followed by the formation of large extramural
cemeteries in various suburbs. and when the cholera again reappeared in
1866, the town having then a population of 478,000, the deaths numbered
1,782. It must be remembered that at that the date the powers now
possessed by local authorities of removing to hospital compulsorily
those infected with this disease, and of conveying to a mortuary the
bodies of those who died from it, did not then exist. The good effects
of forbidding intramural burial in reducing the mortality from cholera
must therefore be admitted. |
|
In all of our modern cemeteries the
suitability of the soil and site is guaranteed by a Government medical
inspector as well as by local officials, who are now well aware of the
importance of such details. The proper drainage is secured, and the
contamination of water rendered impossible. The rights of householders
are protected by the Act which forbids any cemetery being made within
one hundred yards of any dwelling house without consent; but it is very
remarkable that most cemeteries, however isolated they at first may be,
are gradually made to form the nucleus of a new centre of population.
Residences must be built for the officials, and these are generally
within the cemetery itself, or some within and some without. A
sculptor's and statuary yard is a more or less necessary appendage to a
cemetery, and one is generally to be found near at hand. Other
requirements follow, and it is next to impossible for any cemetery to be
absolutely extramural for long after its opening, though, fortunately,
it can never become so intramural as those of old. These facts ought to
induce Burial Boards and those in charge of cemeteries to conduct them
as perfectly, sanitarily speaking, as is possible. |
|
For our cemeteries will be of great value to
the cities, towns, and villages near which they lie, if the are made
suitable recreation grounds for the residents, a conglomeration of
flower gardens and flower beds, delighting the eye of the jaded dweller
in town, and presenting even in winter a green oasis in the desert of
bricks and mortar. Is it really surprising how trees, shrubs, and
flowers will grow even in those cemeteries of the past, which were less
carefully selected than those of more recent date; these leave little in
this respect to be desired. For what were formerly dreary plains or cast
tracts of barren soil are now cemeteries full of verdure, with broad
level walks and every requisite of a well-kept recreation ground. It
only remains to note what improvements are required to make them, as
Lord Stowell said they should be, not only the cemeteries of this
generation but of all to come. |
|
1 Catacombs, vaults, bricked graves, should
be absolutely forbidden. So far from there being anything unreasonable
in this, reason herself demands it. All past experience shows that such
a mockery of burial is unseemly to the dead, an outrage on Nature, and a
very probable source of danger to the living. The dead outnumber the
living to an extent hitherto unknown, and if such encroachments on
cemetery space continue much loner, they will have to be forbidden by
law. How much better that Burial Boards should voluntarily pave the way
by putting a deterrent price upon vaults and by cheapening that of
graves! |
|
2 Every encouragement should be given to
purchasers of graves by selling them at reasonably low prices for cash,
singly or in plots according to the size of the family; or families,
should two or more become joint purchasers. We are not going to suggest
that they should become monopolists, far from it. Let us suppose a
grave-plot of six graves ([1][2][3][4][5][6]) taken by two families.
Now, when the first death occurs, grave No 1 or 6 can be used. If the
soil be suitable and the coffin perishable, the sinking of the mound at
the top will show when the body has been restored to the earth, and the
object of burial secured. If before this happens a second death should
occur, one of the other graves may be opened. and so by this means this
grave plot will hold the remains of families for generation after
generation, and for centuries, like the old village churchyard |
|
|
|
'DISPOSAL OF
THE DEAD' by F W Lowndes |
|
in 'A TREATISE ON HYGIENE AND
PUBLIC HEALTH' Volume 2 |
|
(eds) T STEVENSON & S MURPHY
(1893) |
|
