Chapter IV: Appendix: Page (3)

How long is the dead body retained in the room beside the living?—If
the person has subscribed to a club, or the friends are in
circumstances to afford the expense of the funeral, it takes place,
generally, on the following Sunday, if the death has occurred early
in the week; but if towards the end of the week, then it is
sometimes postponed till the Sunday week after, if the weather
permit; in one case it was twelve days. In the other cases I have
known much opposition to removal till after a subscription had been
collected from the affluent neighbours; and in some instances, after
keeping the body several days, I have been applied to to present the
case to the relieving officer, that it might be buried by the
parish. Amongst the Irish it is retained till after the wake, which
“_is open to all comers_” as long as there is anything _dacent to
drink or smoke_; but I must bear witness, also, to the frequent
exhibition, in a large majority of the poor, of those affectionate
attentions to the mortal remains of their relatives, which all are
anxious to bestow, and which, notwithstanding the danger and want of
accommodation, make them loth to part with them.

In what condition is the corpse usually, or frequently,
retained?—Amongst the Irish, it does not signify of what disease the
person may have died, it is retained often for many days, laid out
upon the only bed, perhaps, and adorned with the best they can
bestow upon it, until the _coronach_ has been performed. Thus fevers
and other contagious diseases are fearfully propagated. I remember a
case of a body being brought from the Fever Hospital to
Bullin-court, and the consequences were dreadful; and this spring I
removed a girl, named Wilson, to the infirmary of the workhouse,
from a room in the same court. I could not remain two minutes in it;
the horrible stench arose from a corpse which had died of phthisis
twelve days before, and the coffin stood across the foot of the bed,
within eighteen inches of it. This was in a small room not above ten
feet by twelve feet square, and a fire always in it, being (as in
most cases of a like kind) the only one for sleeping, living, and
cooking in. I mention these as being particular cases, from which
most marked consequences followed; but I have very many others, in
which the retention of the body has been fraught with serious
results to the survivors.

Will you describe the consequences of such retention?—Upon the 9th
of March, 1840, M—— was taken to the Fever Hospital. He died there,
and without my knowledge the body was brought back to his own room.
The usual practice, in such cases, is to receive them into a
lock-up-room, set apart for that purpose in the workhouse. I find
that upon the 12th his step-son was taken ill. He was removed
immediately to the Fever Hospital. Upon the 18th the barber who
shaved the corpse was taken ill, and died in the Fever Hospital, and
upon the 27th another step-son was taken ill, and removed also.

Upon the 18th of December, 1840, I—— and her infant were brought,
ill with fever, to her father’s room in Eagle-court, which was ten
feet square, with a small window of four panes; the infant soon
died. Upon the 15th of January, 1841, the grandmother was taken ill;
upon the 2nd of February the grandfather also. There was but one
bedstead in the room. They resisted every offer to remove them, and
I had no power to compel removal. The corpse of the grandmother lay
beside her husband upon the same bed, and it was only when he became
delirious and incapable of resistance that I ordered the removal of
the body to the dead-room, and him to the Fever Hospital. He died
there, but the evil did not stop here: two children, who followed
their father’s body to the grave, were, the one within a week and
the other within ten days, also victims to the same disease. In
short, five out of six died.

In October, 1841, a fine girl, C——, died of cynanche maligna: her
body was retained in a small back room. Upon the 1st of November
another child was taken ill, and upon the 4th two others were also
seized with the same disease.

Upon the 2nd of February, 1843, H——, in Heathcock-court, died of
fever. I recommended the immediate removal of the body from the
attic room of small dimensions, but it was retained about ten days,
the widow not consenting to have it buried by the parish, and not
being able to collect funds sooner: their only child was seized with
fever, and was several weeks ill.

Upon the 3rd of March, 1843, B—— died of a fever in Lemontree-yard;
the body was retained some days, in expectation of friends burying
it, but in the mean time a child of B——, and one of a lodger in the
same house, were infected.

Upon the 13th March, 1843, I saw a family in Hervey’s-buildings,
which is more open, and the rooms of a better class than those in
some other situations. I found there the corpse of a person who had
died of a fever; the father and mother were just taken ill, and a
child was taken ill soon after. The foot of the coffin was within
ten inches of the father’s head as he lay upon his pillow. I caused
it to be removed as soon as possible, and the three cases terminated
favourably. In the case in Bullin-court, mentioned before, the girl
Wilson was affected with nausea vertigo, general prostration of
strength, and trembling, the usual symptoms in these cases. Soon
after her removal, the mother of the deceased was seized with
typhus, and is now only so far recovered as scarcely to be able to
go about and attend to another son, who is at present ill of the
same disease. These are a few cases only in which serious evils
followed on retention of the body. I could multiply them, if
necessary; but they will suffice to show that there should be power
of removal to some recognized place of safety given to the district
medical officer for the benefit of the individuals concerned and the
public at large. The rooms are often most wretched in which these
cases occur; the neighbourhood is badly ventilated and drained, or
often not drained at all, and if the medical officer were
responsible for his acts, and bound to report regularly, there would
be a sufficient guarantee that no unnecessary harshness would be
exercised in the performance of a duty absolutely required for the
preservation of the public health, and the safety of those dearest
to the sufferers themselves.

Comparing the effects of the practice of retaining the bodies before
interment, with the effects of emanations from the dead after
interment, when buried in crowded districts, which appears to you to
be the most pernicious practice?—When a body is retained in a small
room, badly ventilated, and often with a fire in it, the noxious
gases evolved in the process of decomposition are presented to
persons exposed to them in a highly concentrated form, and if their
health is in a certain state favourable to receive the contagion,
the effect is immediate. In crowded burial-grounds in which I have
never seen a body at a less depth than three feet from the surface
(allowing for the artificial building up of the ground to give
apparent depth to the grave), the gases having this thickness of
earth to penetrate, arrive at the surface in a divided state, and by
small quantities at a time mix so gradually with the atmosphere,
that it becomes comparatively harmless by dilution, and is scarcely
perceptible. In confined situations, where the ground is limited in
extent, the long continuance of gradual evolutions of noxious matter
would, doubtless, be a cause of debility to surrounding inhabitants;
but such instances, I think, are rare. I have made inquiry in the
immediate neighbourhood of grave-yards, and I form my opinion from
the result. There can be no doubt whatever as to the propriety of
burial beyond the limits of towns, and if the corpse of the poor man
could be deposited at a distance, without entailing a greater
expense upon him, I think it would improve the health of our large
towns very much; but I believe the retention of the corpse in the
room with the living is fraught with greater danger than that
produced by the emanations from even crowded grave-yards.

§ 27. The condition in which the remains are often found on the occurrence of a death at the eastern part of the metropolis are thus described by Mr. John Liddle, the medical officer of the Whitechapel district of the Whitechapel Union.

What is the class of poor persons whom you, as medical officer, are
called upon to attend to?—The dock labourers, navigators,
bricklayers’ labourers, and the general description of labourers
inhabiting Whitechapel and lower Aldgate.

On the occurrence of a death amongst this description of labourers,
what do you find to be the general condition of the family, in
relation to the remains. How is the corpse dealt with?—Nearly the
whole of the labouring population there have only one room. The
corpse is therefore kept in that room where the inmates sleep and
have their meals. Sometimes the corpse is stretched on the bed, and
the bed and bed-clothes are taken off, and the wife and family lie
on the floor. Sometimes a board is got on which the corpse is
stretched, and that is sustained on tressels or on chairs. Sometimes
it is stretched out on chairs. When children die, they are
frequently laid out on the table. The poor Irish, if they can afford
it, form a canopy of white calico over the corpse, and buy candles
to burn by it, and place a black cross at the head of the corpse.
They commonly raise the money to do this by subscriptions amongst
themselves and at the public-houses which they frequent.

What is the usual length of time that the corpse is so kept?—The
time varies according to the day of the death. Sunday is the day
usually chosen for the day of burial. But if a man die on the
Wednesday, the burial will not take place till the Sunday week
following. Bodies are almost always kept for a full week, frequently
longer.

What proportion of these cases may be positively contagious?—It
appears from the Registrar-General’s Report (which, however, cannot
be depended on for perfect accuracy, as the registrar’s returns are
very incorrect,—I do not think I have been required to give a
certificate of death upon more than three occasions), that in the
year 1839, there were 747 deaths from epidemic diseases which formed
about one-fifth of the whole of the deaths in the Whitechapel Union.

Have you had occasion to represent as injurious this practice of
retaining the corpse amidst the living?—I have represented in
several communications in answer to sanitary inquiries from the Poor
Law Commission Office, that it must be and is highly injurious. It
was only three or four days ago that an instance of this occurred in
my own practice, which I will mention. A widow’s son, who was about
15 years of age, was taken ill of fever. Finding the room small, in
which there was a family of five persons living, I advised his
immediate removal. This was not done, and the two other sons were
shortly afterwards attacked, and both died. When fever was epidemic,
deaths following the first death in the same family were of frequent
occurrence. In cases where the survivors escape, their general
health must be deteriorated by the practice of keeping the dead in
the same room.

Do you observe any peculiarity of habit amongst the lower classes
accompanying this familiarity with the remains of the dead?—What I
observe when I first visit the room is a degree of indifference to
the presence of the corpse: the family is found eating or drinking
or pursuing their usual callings, and the children playing. Amongst
the middle classes, where there is an opportunity of putting the
corpse by itself, there are greater marks of respect and decency.
Amongst that class no one would think of doing anything in the room
where the corpse was lying, still less of allowing children there.

Mr. Byles, surgeon, of Spitalfields, states, that the above description is generally applicable to the condition of the dwellings of the labouring classes, and to the circumstances under which the survivors are placed on the occurrence of a death in that district. He observes, moreover—

In the more malignant form of fever, especially scarlatina, the
instances of death following the first case of death are frequent.
The same holds good in respect to measles, and in respect to
small-pox in families where vaccination has been neglected. I have
also known instances of children who had been vaccinated becoming
the subject of fever apparently from the effluvia of the body of a
child who had died of the small-pox. I have often had occasion
urgently to represent to the parish and union officers the necessity
of a forcible interference to remove bodies. Coffins have been sent
and the bodies removed and placed in a vault under the church until
interment, and the rooms limewashed at the expense of the parish.

Were such removals resisted?—Not generally; they were in some few
instances.

§ 28. Mr. Bestow, a relieving officer of the adjacent district of Bethnal Green, who is called upon to visit the abodes of those persons of the labouring classes, who on the occurrence of death fall into a state of destitution, thus exemplifies the common consequences of the retention of the corpse in the living and working rooms of the family:—

Is the corpse generally kept in the living or in the working
room?—In the majority of cases the weavers live and work in the same
room; the children generally sleep on a bed pushed under the loom.
Before a coffin is obtained, the corpse is generally stretched on
the bed where the adults have slept. It is a very serious evil in
our district, the length of time during which bodies have been kept
under such circumstances. I have frequently had to make complaint of
it. We are very often complained to by neighbours of the length of
time during which the bodies are kept. We have very often had
disease occasioned by it. I have known, in one case, as many as
eight deaths, from typhus fever, follow one death; there were five
children and two or three visitors whose illness and deaths were
ascribed to the circumstance.

In January, 1837, a man named Clark, in George Gardens, in this
parish, having been kept a considerable length of time unburied (I
was informed beyond a fortnight), I was directed to visit the case,
and I found the house consisted of two small rooms, wherein resided
his wife and seven children. I remonstrated with them upon the
impropriety of keeping the body so long, and offered either to bury,
or to remove it, as it was then becoming very offensive. I was
informed it would be buried on the following Sunday, as it would not
be convenient for the whole of the relatives to attend the funeral
earlier, and I understood a very great number did attend. I find
that on the 30th of the same month (January) I was called again to
visit Ann Clark, one of the family, in the same miserable abode, who
was lying upon some rags, very ill of fever. I had her removed, but
she ultimately died; and I again remonstrated with the family
remaining in the same house, and offered to take them into the
workhouse, which was declined, stating, it was their intention to
remove in a few days to another house. And on the 20th of February,
my attention was called to the same family, who had then removed to
No. 3, Granby Row, not far from their former abode, and here I found
the mother and the whole of the children (as I had predicted to
them, if they persisted in their habits), all ill of fever without
much hopes of their recovery. I had five removed to the London Fever
Hospital immediately; but out of seven who were affected, two died.
My attention was shortly afterwards directed to Henry Clark, of
Barnet Street, who was a relative, and had taken fever (it was
stated) by having attended the funeral of his friend; he, it seems,
communicated it to his wife and two children, one of whom died; next
followed Stephen Clark, of Edward Street, who, having visited the
above-named relative, and attended the funeral of their infant
shortly afterwards, had fever; also his wife and three children, one
of whom died also. In August, 1837, I was called to visit the case
of Sarah Masterton, No. 11, Suffolk Street, whose husband lay dead
of fever; she was with two children in the same room, and the corpse
not in a coffin. They were in the most deplorable condition, and so
bad with fever that none of the neighbours would venture to enter
the room with me. I had the dead body removed in a shell to our
dead-house, and the woman and children to the infirmary in the
workhouse. Two of them ultimately recovered; one died. In the same
house, and in the upper room, I next found Robert Crisp, with a wife
and child, upon whom I could not prevail to leave the place, and my
urgent entreaties were treated with contempt and bad language.
Ultimately, however, his child died, and not until then could I
persuade him to get another place, neither would he have the infant
removed, or come into the workhouse himself.

William Procktor, residing in a miserable hut in Camden’s Gardens,
of only one room, with a wife and two children, when visited, was
found badly affected with fever, of which the wife died, and the
body was kept in the same place wherein all the family resided and
slept, for more than a week. The man was next attacked, and then the
children; and for a considerable time they were attended by our
medical officer, but I believe they all ultimately recovered.

His report book contained frequent instances of cases of the like description.

§ 29. Mr. T. Abraham, surgeon, one of the Registrars for the City of London, who has had much practice as a parochial medical officer, was asked upon this subject—

In the course of your practice, have you had occasion to believe
that evil effects are produced by the retention of the corpse in the
house?—Yes; I can give an instance of a man, his wife, and six
children, living in one room in Draper’s Buildings. The mother and
all the children successively fell ill of typhus fever: the mother
died; the body remained in the room. I wished it to be removed the
next day, and I also wished the children to be removed, being afraid
that the fever would extend. The children were apparently well at
the time of the death of the mother. The recommendation was not
attended to: the body was kept five days in the only room which this
family of eight had to live and sleep in. The eldest daughter was
attacked about a week after the mother had been removed, and, after
three days’ illness, that daughter died. The corpse of this child
was only kept three days, as we determined that it should positively
be removed. In about nine days after the death of the girl, the
youngest child was attacked, and it died in about nine days. Then
the second one was taken ill; he lay twenty-three days, and died.
Then another boy died. The two other children recovered.

By the immediate removal of the corpse, and the use of proper
preventive means, how many deaths do you believe might have been
prevented?—I think it probable that the one took it from the other,
and that, if the corpse of the first had been removed, the rest
would have escaped, although I, of course, admit that the same cause
which produced the disease in the mother might also have produced it
in the children. I believe that, in cases of typhus, scarlatina, and
other infectious diseases, it frequently happens that the living are
attacked by the same disease from the retention of the body.

Mr. Blencarn, surgeon, one of the medical officers of the City of London Union, was asked—

Have you observed any evil effects following the practice of the
long retention of the corpse in the house amidst the living?—Yes; I
have observed effects follow, but I cannot say produced by them,
though they were perhaps increased by them. In those cases which I
have had, where there has been a succession of cases of fever in the
same family, after a death it has generally occurred that the
parties affected have complained two or three days before that they
felt very unwell. Generally this has been the case. I have in such
instances ordered them medicine immediately. Since the Union has
been established, we have immediately removed all fever cases to the
fever hospital.

The retention of the corpse amidst the living, under such
circumstances, must aggravate the mortality, must it not?—There
cannot be a moment’s doubt about it.

§ 30. Mr. Barnett, surgeon, one of the medical officers of the Stepney Union, thus exemplifies the effects of the practice in his own district. After speaking of the prevalence of nervous depression, ascribable to the contiguity to a crowded grave-yard, he says:—

Similar symptoms are observable when the dead are kept any length of
time in crowded apartments. I well recollect a child dying, during
the summer months, of scarlet fever, and the parents persisted in
keeping the corpse for a considerable period, notwithstanding the
entreaties of the rest of the inmates to the contrary, all of whom
complained of being ill therefrom. The result was the production of
several cases of typhoid fever and much distress. A short time ago,
I was requested to attend a family consisting of five persons; they
resided in a room containing about 500 cubic feet, with but little
light and much less ventilation. One child was suffering from
small-pox, and died in a day or two: the corpse was allowed to
remain in the room. The two other children were soon attacked by the
disease, as well as a child belonging to a person residing in the
same house, who was imprudent enough to bring it into this
apartment, though cautioned not to do so. The stench arising from
the living and dead was so intolerable that it produced in myself
severe head-ache, and my friend, who accompanied me, complained of
sudden nervousness. The parents of these children (one of whom is
since dead) are suffering great debility.

The similarity of symptoms produced in these cases might perhaps
lead us to the conclusion that the cause was probably the same in
all; consequently, whether this poison be diluted or concentrated,
it should, at all times, be carefully avoided. For this purpose, I
should recommend the early removal of the dead from such apartments,
and a check to be put to the baneful practice of burying the dead so
near the surface in crowded districts.

§ 31. The accounts given by the medical practitioners and persons who are chiefly in attendance on the parties before death, are corroborated by the evidence of undertakers and others engaged in providing goods and services for the performance of the last rites for artisans of a condition to defray the funeral expenses.

Mr. Wild, an undertaker, residing in the Blackfriars Road, London, who inters between 500 and 600 bodies annually, of which about 350 are of the working classes, states, that the time during which the corpse is kept in the house varies from five to twelve days.

The greater proportion of the working men in London live and sleep
in one room only, do they not?—Three-fourths of the rooms we have to
visit are single rooms; the one room is the only room the poor
people have.

When you visit the room, in what condition do you find the corpse?
How is it laid out?—Generally speaking, we only find one bed in the
room, and that occupied by a corpse. It frequently happens that
there is no sacking to the bedding; when they borrow a board or a
shutter from a neighbour, in order to lay out the corpse upon it;
they have also to borrow other convenient articles necessary, such
us a sheet. The corpse of a child is usually laid out on the table.
The Irish poor have a peculiar mode of arranging the corpse; they
place candles around the bed, and they have a black cross placed at
the head of the bed.

Is the practice of keeping bodies in the place of abode for a long
time much altered in cases where the death has occurred from fever
or any contagious disease?—Very seldom; they would keep them much
longer if it were not for the undertaker, who urges them to bury
them. In cases of rapid decomposition of persons dying in full habit
there is much liquid; and the coffin is tapped to let it out. I have
known them to keep the corpse after the coffin had been tapped
twice, which has, of course, produced a disagreeable effluvium. This
liquid generates animal life very rapidly; and within six hours
after a coffin has been tapped, if the liquid escapes, maggots, or a
sort of animalculæ, are seen crawling about. I have frequently seen
them crawling about the floor of a room inhabited by the labouring
classes, and about the tressels on which the tapped coffin is
sustained. In such rooms the children are frequently left whilst the
widow is out making arrangements connected with the funeral. And the
widow herself lives there with the children. I frequently find them
altogether in a small room with a large fire.

Have you known instances of the spread of disease amongst the
members of the family residing in the same room where the corpse is
kept?—Some medical men have said that corpses of persons who have
contagious diseases are not dangerous; but my belief is, that in
cases of small-pox and scarlatina it is dangerous; and only the
other day a case of this nature occurred,—a little boy, who died of
the small-pox. Soon after he died, his sister, a little girl who had
been playing in the same room, was attacked with small-pox and died.
The medical attendant said, the child must have touched the corpse.
A poor woman, a neighbour, went over to see one of these bodies, and
was much afflicted and frightened, and I believe touched the body.
She was certainly attacked with the small-pox, and, after lingering
some time, died a few days since. The other day at Lambeth, the
eldest child of a person died of scarlet fever. The child was about
four years old; it had been ill a week. There were two other
children, one was three years old and the other sixteen months. When
the first child died there were no symptoms of illness for three
days afterwards, the corpse of the eldest was kept in the house;
here it was in a separate room, but the medical man recommended
early interment, and it was buried on the fourth day. The youngest
child had been taken by the servant into the room where the corpse
was, to see it, and this child was taken ill just before the burial
and died in about a week. The corpse of this child was retained in
the house three weeks. It is supposed that the other child had also
been taken into the room to see the corpse and touch it, and at the
end of the three weeks it also died. The medical attendant was
clearly of opinion that had the first child been early removed, it
would have been saved. The undertaker’s men who have to put into
coffins the corpses of persons who have died from any contagious
disease, are sometimes sick and compelled to take instantly gin or
brandy; and they will feel sickly for some hours after, but they are
not known to catch the disease. I have often heard the men say on
the morning following, “I have been able to take no breakfast
to-day,” and have complained of want of appetite for some time
after.

Mr. Jeffereys, an undertaker, residing in Whitechapel, gives a similar account of the dreadful effects of this practice.

It is stated that the practice of keeping the body in the house is a
very great evil; how long have you known bodies to be kept in the
house before interment?—I have known them to be kept three weeks: we
every week see them kept until the bodies are nearly putrid:
sometimes they have run away almost through the coffin, and the poor
people, women and children, are living and sleeping in the same room
at the same time. In some cases there is superstition about the
interments, but it is not very frequent. Then when the corpse is
uncovered, or the coffin is open, females will hang over it. A widow
who hung over the body of her husband, caught the disease of which
he died. The doctor told her he knew she must have kissed or touched
the body: she died, leaving seven orphans, of whom four are now in
an orphan asylum. A young man died not long since, and his body
rapidly decomposed. His sister, a fine healthy girl, hung over the
corpse and kissed it; in three weeks after she died also.

§ 32. The descriptions given by the labouring classes themselves of the circumstances precedent to the removal of the body for interment, are similar to those in the instances above cited. They are thus described by John Downing, one of several respectable mechanics examined:—

You, as secretary [of a burial society] are called upon to attend
the funeral; are you not?—Yes, I am. It is part of our rules, also,
that the secretary shall see the body and identify it. When old
members, whom I have known, have been sick, I have visited them,
although I am not obliged to do it.

What in the case of death is the condition in which you generally
find the corpse?—It is generally stretched out on a shutter, with a
sheet over it. Children are generally laid out on the table.

In how many cases do you find that those whom you visit, who may
perhaps be considered to be of the class of respectable mechanics,
do you find them occupying more than one room?—About one case in
six.

Have you observed any effects from the long retention of the body in
the same room as the family?—Yes, I have known children to have
taken the disease and die; I have also known the widow who has hung
over the body and kissed it, become ill and die through it. I have
known other cases where there has been severe illness. I have myself
been made ill by visiting them; I have felt giddy in the head and
very sick, and have gone to the nearest house of refreshment to get
some brandy. I have felt the effects for two or three days.

§ 33. The next class of witnesses, who receive the remains at the place of burial, attest the fact that the smell from the coffin is frequently powerfully offensive, and that it is by no means an uncommon occurrence that the decomposing matter escapes from it, and in the streets, and in the church, and in the church-yard, runs down over the shoulders of the bearers.

§ 34. So far as the inquiry has proceeded in the provincial towns, it appears that the practice of keeping the corpse in the crowded living rooms does not differ essentially from the practice in the metropolis. Mr. R. Craven, a surgeon residing at Leeds, who has had great experience amongst that population, states—

The Irish almost universally live huddled together in great numbers
in a small space. I have often known as many as twenty human beings
lodged and fed in a dirty filthy cottage with only two rooms. Great
many live in cellar dwellings. I have frequently seen a cellar
dwelling lodge a family of seven to ten persons, and that in close
confined yards. I have seen a cellar dwelling in one of the most
densely-populated districts of Leeds in which were living seven
persons, with one corner fenced off and a pig in it; a ridge of clay
being placed round the fence to prevent the wet from the pigsty
running all over the floor, and to this cellar there was no
drainage.

I believe that a much larger proportion of the Irish attacked by
fever, die, than of English. Children they do not make so much
parade of, as here is greater difficulty of obtaining the funds for
their burial. It is no uncommon thing to see a corpse laid out in a
room where eight to twelve persons have to sleep, and sometimes even
both sleep and eat.

He also states also that—

Amongst the hand-loom weavers there is some difference. They
generally live in cottages consisting of two small rooms or cellar
dwellings; these have always a large space occupied by the loom; and
in cottages of two rooms I have frequently seen two families
residing having in the upper room two looms. When deaths occur in
this class the corpse cannot be laid out without occupying the space
where the family have to work (the father or mother weaving, and
children winding or rendering other assistance), or in the room
where they live and eat. This, I am of opinion, has a very debasing
effect on the morals of this class of the community, making
especially the rising generation so familiar with death that their
feelings are not hurt by it: it has also a very injurious physical
effect, frequently propagating disease in a rapid manner and to an
immense extent.

§ 35. Mr. Christopher Fountaine Browne, one of the parochial surgeons of Leeds, whose district comprehends a population of 45,000 persons, chiefly of the working classes, states that:—

The people amongst whom I practise generally occupy one room where
they live in, and a bed-room above; but I have known many instances
of a family, say a man, his wife, and from three to six children,
having only one bed and one apartment for all purposes. But a great
many dwellings there consist of only one room, and in many of the
lodging-houses I have seen five or six beds in one small room, in
which it has been acknowledged that from 12 to 14 persons have
passed the night, and the air has been so bad that I have been
compelled to stand at the window whilst visiting the patient.

He also states, that—

He has seen many deaths take place in such houses when the body
remains in the bed where it died; and I have known it remain two or
three nights before interment. In Irish cases they keep them longer.
I have seen a child lie in a down-stairs room in a corner, dead of
small-pox, and another dying, and the house full of lodgers eating
their meals. The length of time that a corpse is kept varies very
much according to the disposition of the relatives and the means of
procuring a burial, as there are no restrictions as to the length of
time bodies are to be kept.

I have observed, that in cases of small-pox disease frequently
follows in rapid succession on different members of the same family.
I have frequently known cases of a low typhoid character arise where
many persons sleep in the same room: the addition of a death from
any such cause of course increases the danger to the living.

In Manchester and in several northern districts, it appears that by custom the corpse seldom remains unburied more than three or four days, but during that time it remains in the crowded rooms of the living of the labouring classes. Every day’s retention of the corpse is to be considered an aggravation of the evil; but the evidence is to be borne in mind that the miasma from the dead is more dangerous immediately after death, or during the first and second day, than towards the end of the week. In a proportion of cases decomposition has commenced before the vital functions have ceased; immediately after death decomposition often proceeds with excessive rapidity in the crowded rooms, which have then commonly larger fires than usual.

§ 36. It is observed by some of the witnesses that usually, and except by accident, and in few cases, the miasma from the remains of the dead in grave-yards can only reach the living in a state of diffusion and dilution; and that large proportions of it probably escape without producing any immediately appreciable evil. The practice, however, of the retention of the remains in the one room of the living brings the effluvium to bear directly upon the survivors when it is most dangerous, when they are usually exhausted bodily by watching, and depressed mentally by anxiety and grief—circumstances which it is well known greatly increase the danger of contagion. The males of the working-classes in general die earlier than the females, and in the greater number of cases the last duties fall to the widow; and the prevalence of fatal disease chiefly amongst the children is frequently attributed to the circumstance, that she is aroused from the stunning effect of the bereavement by the necessity of going abroad and seeking pecuniary aid, and making arrangements for the funeral, whilst the children are left at home in the house with the corpse.

In Scotland, from an aversion to sleeping in the presence of the corpse, it is the practice to sit up with it, and there is then much drinking of ardent spirits. Mr. W. Dyce Guthrie speaks strongly of the evils attendant upon the practice of the unguarded retention of the body under such circumstances, and of the instances known by himself where persons have come from a distance to attend the funeral of a departed friend, and have returned infected with a disease similar to that which terminated the friend’s existence. The concurrent and decided opinion of himself and a number of other medical witnesses is, that the public health is much more affected by the pestiferous influence of the corpse during the interval of time that occurs from the moment of death, up to the hour of the funeral, than it commonly is or can be after interment.

§ 37. Of the deaths which take place in the metropolis, it will be seen that more than one-half are the deaths of the labouring classes. The following table, taken from the Mortuary Registries during the year 1839, shows the numbers of deaths amongst the chief classes of society, and the proportions of deaths from epidemic diseases. At least four out of five of the deaths of the labouring classes, it will be remembered, are stated to occur in the single living and sleeping room, that is to say, upwards of 20,000 annually.

───────────┬─────────────────────┬───────┬─────────┬─────────┬─────────
│ │ │ │Ratio of │
│ │ Ratio │Number of│ Deaths │ Average
│ │ of │ Deaths │ from │ Age at
│ │Deaths │ from │Epidemic,│Death of
│ Number of Deaths of │ of │Epidemic,│Endemic, │the whole
│ each Class. │ Chil- │Endemic, │ and │ Class,
│ │dren to│ and │ Conta- │including
│ │ Total │ Conta- │ gious │ Chil-
│ │Deaths.│ gious │ Disease │ dren.
│ │ │Diseases.│to Total │
│ │ │ │ Deaths. │
───────────┼───────┬──────┬──────┼───────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────
│ │Chil- │ │ │ │ │
│ │ dren │ │ │ │ │
│Adults.│under │Total.│ │ │ │
│ │ 10 │ │ │ │ │
│ │Years.│ │ │ │ │
───────────┼───────┼──────┼──────┼───────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────
Gentry, │ │ │ │ │ │ │
Profes- │ │ │ │ │ │ │
sional │ 1,724│ 529│ 2,253│ 1 in│ 210│ 1 in│ 44
Persons, │ │ │ │ 4–3/10│ │ 10–7/10│
& their │ │ │ │ │ │ │
Families │ │ │ │ │ │ │
Tradesmen, │ │ │ │ │ │ │
Clerks, &│ 3,979│ 3,703│ 7,682│ 1 in│ 1,428│ 1 in│ 25
their │ │ │ │ 2–1/10│ │ 5–4/10│
Families │ │ │ │ │ │ │
Undescribed│ 2,996│ 2,761│ 5,757│ 1 in│ 1,051│ 1 in│ 28
│ │ │ │ 2–1/10│ │ 5–5/10│
Labourers │ │ │ │ 1 in│ │ 1 in│
and their│ 12,045│13,885│25,930│ 1–9/10│ 5,469│ 4–8/10│ 22
Families │ │ │ │ │ │ │
Paupers │ 3,062│ 593│ 3,655│ 1 in│ 557│ 1 in│ 49
│ │ │ │ 6–2/10│ │ 6–6/10│
───────────┼───────┼──────┼──────┼───────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────
Total │ 23,806│21,471│45,277│ 1 in│ 8,715│ 1 in│ 27
│ │ │ │ 2–1/10│ │ 5–2/10│
───────────┴───────┴──────┴──────┴───────┴─────────┴─────────┴─────────

In making up this table, all who were not distinguished as master tradesmen were entered as mechanics. This circumstance would give to the labouring classes an appearance of a higher average age of death than is gained by them. On the other hand, some of the labouring classes will be found to have died in the workhouse, which would perhaps keep the average where it now stands, whilst if the registration were more accurate, the average age of death of the middle classes might be found to be about 27. The average age of death of 27 given for the whole metropolis is not made as an average of the averages, but from the average of the whole. The apparent high average of the age of death of paupers arises from the smaller proportion of children amongst them: and the larger proportion of aged adults who seek refuge in the workhouse.[10]

§ 38. The deaths registered from epidemic, endemic, and contagious diseases during the year 1839, which was by no means an unhealthy year, were as follows in Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, and Birmingham:—

─────────────────┬─────────────────┬─────────────────┬───────────────── │ │ Deaths from │ Ratio of Deaths │ Total Number of │ Epidemic, │ from Epidemic │ Deaths. │ Endemic, and │ Disease to the │ │ Contagious │ Total Number of │ │ Diseases. │ Deaths. ─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼───────────────── Liverpool │ 7,435│ 1,844│1 in 4 Manchester │ 6,774│ 2,006│1 in 3–4/10 Leeds │ 4,388│ 965│1 in 4–5/10 Birmingham │ 3,639│ 747│1 in 4–9/10 ─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────

The numbers of deaths which occurred during that year amongst the labouring classes are not distinguished, but they were for the next year as follows. And in the three first-named towns, I conceive that the proportion of cases of deaths amongst those classes where the corpse is kept in the living room, is in all probability as great as in the metropolis.

Liverpool 5,597
Manchester 4,629
Leeds 3,395
Birmingham 2,715

I am unaware of any data existing in the towns in Scotland from which any estimate can be made of the extent to which the evils in question are prevalent there. In the recent Report on the Census, sufficient is shown of the condition of the labouring population in the towns in Ireland to prove, that in them, the evils must fall with at least as great severity as they are described to occur in the worst, conditioned districts in England.[11]

§ 39. If the returns and the statements of witnesses acquainted with the crowded districts be correct, that four out of five families of the labouring classes have each but one room, then every unit of upwards of 20,000 deaths per annum which occur in the metropolis, every unit of 4600 deaths of the labouring classes which occur annually at Liverpool, must be taken as representing a horrible scene of the retention of the corpse amidst the family in the manner described in the testimony of those who have witnessed it;—and every unit of some 4000 deaths from epidemics in the metropolis, and every third or fourth recorded death in other towns, and even in crowded villages, represents a distressing scene, and moreover a case of peculiar danger and probable permanent injury to the survivors amongst whom it takes place. Great, however, as may be the physical evils to them, the evidence of the mental pain and moral evil generally attendant on the practice of the long retention of the body in the rooms in use and amidst the living, though only noticed incidentally, is yet more deplorable.

§ 40. The duty which attaches to male relations, or which a benevolent pastor, if there were the accommodation, would exercise on the occurrence of the calamity of death to any member of a family, is to remove the sensitive and the weakly from the spectacle, which is a perpetual stimulus to excessive grief, and commonly a source of painful associations and visible images of the changes wrought in death, to haunt the imagination in after-life. When the dissolution has taken place under circumstances such as those described, it is not a few minutes’ look after the last duties are performed and the body is composed in death and left in repose, that is given to this class of survivors, but the spectacle is protracted hour after hour through the day and night, and day after day, and night after night, thus aggravating the mental pains under varied circumstances, and increasing the dangers of permanent bodily injury. The sufferings of the survivors, especially of the widow of the labouring classes, are often protracted to a fatal extent. To the very young children, the greatest danger is of infection in cases of deaths from contagious and infectious disease. To the elder children and members of the family and inmates, the moral evil created by the retention of the body in their presence beyond the short term during which sorrow and depression of spirits may be said to be natural to them is, that familiarity soon succeeds, and respect disappears. These consequences are revealed by the frequency of the statements of witnesses, that the deaths of children immediately following, of the same disease of which the parent had died, had been accounted for by “the doctor,” or the neighbours, in the probability that the child had caught the disease by touching the corpse or the coffin, whilst playing about the room in the absence of the mother. Dr. Reicke, in the course of his dissertation on the physical dangers from exposure to emanations from the remains, mentions an instance where a little child having struck the body of the parent which had died of a malignant disease, the hand and arm of the child was dangerously inflamed with malignant pustules in consequence. The mental effects on the elder children or members of the family of the retention of the body in the living room, day after day, and during meal times, until familiarity is induced,—retained, as the body commonly is, during all this time in the _sordes_ of disease, the progress of change and decomposition disfiguring the remains and adding disgust to familiarity,—are attested to be of the most demoralizing character. Such deaths occur sooner or later in various forms in every poor family; and in neighbourhoods where there are no sanitary regulations, where they are ravaged by epidemics, such scenes are doubly familiar to the whole population.

§ 41. Astonishment is frequently excited by the cases which abound in our penal records indicative of the prevalence of habits of savage brutality and carelessness of life amongst the labouring population; but crimes, like sores, will commonly be found to be the result of wider influences than are externally manifest; and the reasons for such astonishment, will be diminished in proportion as those circumstances are examined, which influence the minds and habits of the population more powerfully than precepts or book education. Among these demoralizing circumstances, which appear to be preventible or removable, are those which the present inquiry brings to light. Disrespect for the human form under suffering, indifference or carelessness at death,—or at that destruction which follows as an effect of suffering—is rarely found amongst the uneducated, unconnected with a callousness to others’ pain, and a recklessness about life itself. A known effect on uneducated survivors of the frequency of death amongst youth or persons in the vigour of life, is to create a reckless avidity for immediate enjoyment. Some examples of the demoralization attendant on such circumstances cannot but be apparent in the evidence arising in the course of this inquiry into other practices connected with interments.

§ 42. On submitting the above to a friend, a clergyman, whose benevolence has carried him to alleviate the sufferings in several hundred death-bed scenes in the abodes of the labouring classes, and who has been present, perhaps, at every death in his own flock, in a wretchedly crowded parish, he writes in the following terms his confirmation:—

“The whole of this I can testify, from personal knowledge, to be just. With the upper classes, a corpse excites feelings of awe and respect; with the lower orders, in these districts, it is often treated with as little ceremony as the carcase in a butcher’s shop. Nothing can exceed their desire for an imposing funeral; nothing can surpass their efforts to obtain it; but the deceased’s remains share none of the reverence which this anxiety for their becoming burial would seem to indicate. The inconsistency is entirely, or at least in great part, to be attributed to a single circumstance—that the body is never absent from their sight—eating, drinking, or sleeping, it is still by their side; mixed up with all the ordinary functions of daily life, till it becomes as familiar to them as when it lived and moved in the family circle. From familiarity it is a short step to desecration. The body, stretched out upon two chairs, is pulled about by the children, made to serve as a resting-place for any article that is in the way, and is not seldom the hiding-place for the beer-bottle or the gin if any visitor arrives inopportunely. Viewed as an outrage upon human feeling, this is bad enough; but who does not see that when the respect for the dead, that is, for the human form in its most awful stage, is gone, the whole mass of social sympathies must be weakened—perhaps blighted and destroyed? At any rate, it removes that wholesome fear of death which is the last hold upon a hardened conscience. They have gazed upon it so perpetually, they have grown so intimate with its terrors, that they no longer dread it, even when it attacks themselves, and the heart which vice has deadened to every appeal of religion is at last rendered callous to the natural instinct of fear.”

That it is possible by legislative means to stay the progress of this dreadful demoralization, which must, if no further heed be taken of it, go on with the increased crowding of an increasing population; that it is possible to abate the mental and physical suffering; to extend to the depressed urban districts an acceptable and benign and elevating influence on such impressive occasions; may be confidently affirmed, and will in a subsequent stage of this Report be endeavoured to be shown by reference to actual examples of successful measures.

_Expenses of Funerals and their effects on the Living._

§ 43. The practice of the long retention of the dead before burial being the one from which the greatest evil accrues, the circumstances by which the practice is chiefly influenced are the first submitted for consideration.

The causes which influence this practice amongst the greatest number of the population appear to be, first, the expense of funerals—next, the delay in making arrangements for the funeral,—the natural reluctance to part with the remains of the deceased, and occasionally a feeling of apprehension, sometimes expressed on the part of the survivors, against premature interment.

The expense of interments, though it falls with the greatest severity on the poorest classes, acts as a most severe infliction on the middle classes of society, and governs so powerfully the questions in respect to the present and future administrative arrangements, and involves so many other evils, as to require as complete an exposition as possible of its extent and operation.

The testimony of witnesses of the most extensive experience is of the following tenor in London and the crowded town districts of England. Mr. Byles, the surgeon, of Spitalfields, in reference to the delay of interments, states—

The difficulty of raising the subscription to bury the dead, is I
apprehend one chief cause of the delay. When, in the instance of the
death of a child, I ask why it cannot be interred earlier, the usual
reply is, we cannot raise the money earlier.

Mr. Wild, the undertaker, states—

The time varies from five to twelve days. This arises from the
difficulty of procuring the means of making arrangements with the
undertaker, and the difficulty of getting mourners to attend the
funeral. They have a great number to attend, neighbours,
fellow-workmen, as well as relations. The mourners with them vary
from five to eight couple; it is always an agreement for five couple
at the least.