BURNING THE DEAD.

Evening Star, Issue 3425, 12 February 1874, Page 3

BURNING THE DEAD.

We extract the following from a paper “ on the advantages of burning the dead,” read by Dr Heild, before the Koyal Society of Victoria * 1 think there is no more loathsome object than a putrid human body. It offends the senses, and it shocks the sensibilities even of those whose duties makes them familiar with the sight. Whether the body be above ground, in the earth, or under the water, a number of offensive gases are liberated, and the air is thereby contaminated, and rendered to that extent less fit for respiration. . . In this part of the world we have benefited by the experience of the old country, and in Victoria at least there are no such things as churchyards, as we understand the phrase. But in all other respects we bury our dead pretty much as they have been buried in the old country for the last 1500 years. We enclose them in wooden boxes, and lay them iu the earth to rot. During the last seven years I have had the opportunity of examining some hundreds of bodies iu all stages of decomposition, and I have probably, in studying the phenomena of putrefaction as a part of my professional duty, become so accustomed to the sight of this form of fermentation, that I am now less conscious of the repulsiveneas which characterises this chemical process than are those who witness it only occasionally. But I am not the less aware of the extent to which the atmosphere must of necessity be polluted by the gases arising, slowly hut surely, through the earth out of the graves of the thousands of bodies which are annually interred in this large city Considering, therefore, how serious a deterioration of the atmosphere is likely to take place by the con tinual passing into it of the volatilised portions of the dead that we bury in the earth 1 have for some time concluded that it would only be in accordance with the progress of hygienic improvement to substitute for the slow, dangerous, and loathsome process of putrefactive fermentation, that of rapid decomposition by fire, Cremention is one of the most ancient of many modes in which the dead have been disposed of ; and I need hardly remark that it is still practised iu

some countries, notably in India, at the present day. Of all the many methods at various times in use, it commends itself to my thinking as the most rational. It substitutes for a process that takes months to complete, and which is accompanied by a concomitant product of the most disgusting kind, a rapid method whose products do not offend the senses, which do not pollute the air, and which do not, therefore, endanger the health of the living. By the aid of fire, in the course of an hour or two, a body can be resolved into carbonic acid, watery vapor, and a few ounces of solid residuum ; for I need hardly say that the. earthly residual portion of a body forms a very small percentage of the whole mass, which consists mostly of water, I am fully aware that the prejudices of modem society are so strong as to prevent the practical adoption of cremation for many years to come; but I think it will be adopted as an almost necessary part of sanitary ordinance. Ido not claim to be original in having now suggested its revival. Professor Polli, of Milan, has lately been strongly advocating its resumption, and, in England, its desirability has latterly been discussed with emphatic approval by several leading social reformers, 'there is an additional argument in favor ot its adoption in the old country, in that graveyards and cemeteries frequently occupy valuable ground which could be put to more rational use than to serve as pits of putrefactive foulness. This reason does not so strongly declare itself in Australia, because we might bury our dead in the far interior, where population is not likely to extend for the next century. The only objection would be the expense ; and on this point I may take occasion to say that the burning process would of necessity be much more economical than any other, I think the useless display frequently made at funerals, for which it is as difficult to account as it is apparently impossible by any sort of reasoning to counteract, is of many unwise customs one of the most unwise. This habit of lavish outlay at funerals is probably a part, of tho present system of inhumation, and the revival of cremation might bring with it a simpler and less costly form of obsequies. The objection to the revival of the process of cremation is, I have no doubt, principally of a sentimental kind. . . . I am afraid that in this, as in some other social questions, we are disposed to judge according to our prejudices, and not in obedience to the suggestions of our reason. For all this, Ido not forget that some prejudices are respectable, not because they are reasonable, but on account of their having the sanction of long usage, and in that they are held by persons of whose truthfulness and honesty of purpose there is no sort of question. lam prepared, indeed, for encountering both abuse and ridicule for having brought this subject before the society, and through it to have drawn the attention of the community generally to it. Ido not expect to see, the practice of cremation adopted ; the old method is too intimately associated with long established custom to make itlikelv that such an innovation would be received, or even discussed, without some feeling! But I think that, for reasons of health, convenience, economy, and the encouragement of art, it will one day be the established mode of disposing of the dead, and that the sacredness of the affections will be in the reality much more absolutely respected than they are now by the present system, which dispassionately considered, is revolting to a well-ordered mind, and on sanitary grounds hurtful to the common well-being. 1 would only add that the resources now at our command in the way of chemical appliances, by means of which an intense heat can bo obtained, would enable us to effect the destruction of a body much more rapidly than by the old-fashioned and clumsy mode of a log vr 6- P lO of a paper in ‘Fraser’s Magazine,’ to which ray attention has been directed by an esteemed friend, has drawn attention in advocating the substitution of cremation for inhumation, to the great advantages we possess over the ancients in this particular. It will be admitted, however, that if in a few minutes, by the employment of a very high temperature, we could produce complete incineration, we should avoid those intermediate stages in the progress which are occasionally described somewhat sensationally by those who have witnessed the bunding ol bodies in India,