Please wait. Contacting image service... loading

Article text

THE CREMATION SOCIETY OF
VICTORIA.
From the Argus.
A r'UBLC meeting was held on 3rd November,
under the auspices of the Cremation Society
ofVictoria, in the'upper hall of the Athens-um.
Mr. Justice A'Beckett presided, and the hall
was crowded.
The Chairman, in opening the proceedings,
said there were two sides to the subject of
cremation-the sentimental and the sanitary.
To some minds the present system of disposal
of the dead involved reflections of an un
pleasant and painful nature. For that sys
tem, with all its processes of corruption, with
all its horrors and all its unpleasantnesses,
could be substituted cremation, with its rapid
extinction by flame; and he believed that
the substitution would be welcomed by many.
The process of extinction by fire relieved the
mind from the contemplation of the horrors
of the present system, allowed it to dwell on
the body. as it was last seen, and to know that
no worse fate had befallen it than attended
extinction by fire without degradation of the
matter which was consumed. Cremation had
commended itself to his mind as a substitute
for the present system of burial of the dead
from the views he had stated, and it had also
commended itselt to him from a sanitary as
pect.. From the observations of scientific men
there was no doubt that dangers of a most
serious character attended the present system
-dangers which were not merely ofifnsive
to the imagination, but injurious to health
and life. The Oremation Society did not
wish to force its views on those who did not
approve of them, but its members desired to
have an opportunity to give effect to the
process they approved of. If any persons
wished to become members of the society the
secretary would receive subscriptions, which
were fixed at 5s. per year each member, and
a declaration of opinion would be required
from would-be members that they were in
favour of the system of cremation.
Dr. M'Crae, in speaking of the sanitary
necessity of cremation, said that the present
system of burial involved contamination of
the ground and the water in it with the
products of the diseases of the persons buried.
A great number of deaths had been caused
by the present system, and also an enormous
amount of sickness. He had come to the
conclusion that it would be most advantageous
to adopt cremation, which would destroy all
the injurious particles of a dead body.
Dr. Gresswell also spoke on the sanitary
necessity of cremation. He stated that there
was in present ages, as compared with those
in the past, comparative immunity from
plagues and pestilences, and that had been
brought about in a great measure by the de
struction of almost all forms of organic waste.
There were various ways of destroying the
organic matter of human bodies and of do
mestic animals. One was destruction by fire
and another was putrefaction by burial, the
latter was the worst that could be adopted
with regard to the human body. He cer
tainly could not prefer that system to crema
tion. The germs of the cholera, malaria,
anthrax, yellow fever, tetanus, and a great
number of other communicable diseases lived
in the ground, and when they bore that in
mind they should be slow in saying they were
justified ir. putting into the earth dead bodies
colonised with the actual agents of communi
cable diseases. He was thoroughly in favour
of the view that cremation was advisable and
a certain necessity if the purity of the atmos
phere and ground were to be maintained.
Mr. Justice Williams, who was received
with cheers, said that cremation was perfectly
legal, and there was no law against it. If
any of those present desired to establish a
clematory in their gardens' and burn the
bodies of the dead they might do so as long
as they liked, providing they did it decently,
and without making a nuisance. They might
continue to carry it on unless Parliament in
terfered to stop it. If it were adopted in an
extensive manner and without proper regula
tion, Parliament might step in to prevent it
on the ground that it might lead to crime.
The only tangible objection he had ever
heard against cremation was that it might
perhaps prevent the detection of crimes
which were detected under the present
system. He was referring more particularly
to cases in which persons had been poisoned;
but if a proper crematory were established a
medical certificate might be required from
the medical man who attended on a deceased
person as to the cause of death. That cer
tificate should be corroborated by one from
another independent medical man If no
medical man had attended on the deceased
person there should be a post-morteet held
on the body, and lie considered that if those
precautions were adopted no person who
poisoned another would desire to have the
body cremated. To illustrate his view, his
Honour referred to a case he tried at Stawell
not long ago, when a woman was charged with
poisoning her husband. When that man
died a magisterial inquiry was held, at
which the presiding magistrate was a farmer,
and a certificate was given that the man died
from natural causes, and he was then buried.
Some time afterwards suspicion was aroused
and the body was exhumed, and it was found
there was enough arsenic in it to kill a dozen
men. No medical man had attended on the
deceased. If cremation had been the law of
the land and the precautions he had referred
to had been adopted there would have been a
post-inortem held on the deceased, and then
the arsenic would have been discovered in the
body before it was cremated. Under the
present system scores of people had been laid
in the ground who had been poisoned, and
the crimes had never been detected.
The Rev. W. C. Ford, who referred to the
:esthetic aspect of cremation, stated that a
very large number of the clergy in England
of the Church to which lie had the honour to
belong subscribed to the doctrine of crema
tion.
Professor Tucker stated that cremation
was practised by the ancient Greeks and
Romans, and it worked well. In later times
amongst the Romans burials and cremations
were both practised, and the question was one
of expense. Cremation was expensive, and
was practised by the rich, who could afford it,
and burial was practised more generally by
the poorer classes. Cremation eventually fell
into desuetude, but there was a feasible
explanation for that. Christianity spread
most widely amongst the poor, who were the
persons who practised burials. It was also
an offshoot from Judaism, under which the
custom of burial was practised, and therefore
the acceptors of Christianuity generally adopted
the Iurial system. The rich, who retained
paganism longer than the poor, also retained
cremation, but eventually both paganism and
cremation died out. There was no objection
to cremation now on the ground of expense.
He felt that it was the more natural mode of
disposing of the dead, and hlie did not despair
of a time when it would be adopted gener
ally.
Mr. F. R. Godfrey contended that it was
cheaper to dispose of the human body by
cremation than by burial, and said that while
it cost from about £5 to £7 here to bury a
body the cost of cremating bodies by tmhe
London Cretumatory Society in 1891 was only
£1 13s. 4d.
The meeting then closed.
It is a popular belief that the prima donna
and her artistic brothers and sisters pin their
taith on drinking stout. So perhaps it will
be a surprise to find that this is not mentioned
wheln Mr. Santley gives his opinion as to
swhat he thinks ubout drinlingi alcohol.
" People often ask mie, do I believe in alcohol ?
A.s it exists, imore or less, in everything I eat
and drink, 1 aum bound to believe in it. I
presumie, if they would speak plainly, they
wsoull ask. do I drink wine, beer or spirits?
Wine and beer contain alcohol, but I object
to their being called by that uname. They
contain, besides, many elements beneficial to
the hIuuman system, and are entitled to ian im
I portant place among fbods. Beer I never
liked, and very rarely take. Spirits I care
little for, but I find a little 'nightcap' soothing.
Wine I like very much, and took whenever I
I could get it, swhich was seldom before I went
to Italy; since then regularly, both at lunch
and dinner."
$