Chapter VIII: Appendix: Page (7)

In the parishes of St. Giles-in-the-Fields, St. George, Hanover-square, St. James, Westminster, and St. Martin’s-in-the-Fields, over-crowding of the burial grounds within the parish, between forty and fifty years ago, led the parish officers to obtain local acts for the establishment of burial grounds in the suburbs. The spaces then obtained were apart from any buildings. They are all now closely surrounded by them. The burial grounds of the parish of St. Giles-in-the-Fields having been the subject of an investigation before the Committee of the House of Commons, I have not made any inquiries with relation to them. In the suburban burial ground which belongs to the parish of St. George, Hanover-square, which consists of two acres of land, the interments have been for many years at the rate of about 1000 corpses per annum. It is now in the centre of a dense town population. It has become the subject of complaints similar to those made in respect to burial grounds in the ancient parts of the metropolis; and it appears that there are equally good grounds for the discontinuance of the practice of interment there, and for the selection of a burial place at a greater distance, notwithstanding that the payments from individuals produce to the collective funds of that parish a surplus beyond the expenditure of the management of the ground.

§ 107. The arrangements for burial in the parishes of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, which has a population of 25,000, and of St. James, Westminster, which has a population of 37,000, where the suburban burial grounds have not been crowded to the same extent, may be adduced as a high class of examples of a change of practice to extra-mural or suburban burials, and of management by a parochial machinery. In the parish of St. James, Westminster—

The gross expenditure of the chapel and ground between the years
1789 and 1835 (46 years) amounted to £73,879 1_s._ 11_d._, and it is
estimated that the cost of maintaining the chapel and ground during
that period over and above the receipts was not less than £50,000,
the whole of which was drawn from the churchwardens under authority
of the Act of Parliament.

But the chapel attached to the burial ground of this parish has been converted into a chapel of ease, for the accommodation of the inhabitants of the parish where it is situate. The vestry clerk of the parish states—

The pew rents, which formerly averaged only £150, now amount to
upwards of £500 per annum, while the burial fees have decreased, and
are still decreasing in amount.

The interments of the middle class and more wealthy among the
inhabitants of the parish of St. James, which do not take place
either in the vaults or grounds of or belonging to the parish, are
presumed to be made in the neighbouring cemeteries, while the
labouring class resort chiefly, as I am informed, to the burial
ground in Spa Fields, where the fees are less by 2_s._ 9_d._ than at
the Hampstead Road ground, the undertaker’s charges being the same
for each.

Is the church to be considered part of the burial ground?—Yes; it
is. The Act apparently contemplated only a place for the performance
of a service over the dead, not for services to regular
congregations. The minister has a house on the ground, and derives a
portion of his emoluments from pew rents, derived from persons who
attend the chapel from the immediate neighbourhood—parishioners of
St. Pancras parish; very few, if any, of the parishioners of St.
James, have pews there. The minister, Dr. Stebbing, has a moiety of
the pew rents, which now amount to nearly £500 per annum. His
proportion of the burial fees may be about £70 per annum.

Since the commencement, has the income defrayed the expenses of the
burial ground?—Since Dr. Stebbing has been the minister it has only
just paid the expenses; but I am apprehensive that it will not
continue to do so. By the Act for the regulation of the chapel, any
deficiency in the expenditure is directed to be made good out of the
moneys in the churchwardens’ hands. Since the establishment of the
chapel it has been a drag on the funds: a very severe one.

When the chapel was established were there any houses round it?—Not
any.

What is its condition in that respect now?—It is now in the midst of
houses which are increasing in numbers.

When asked, what was the condition of the burial ground, notwithstanding the expenditure made upon it, he states that—

The ground, consisting of four acres, is in a very watery condition,
but is considered capable of being effectually drained, the expense
being the only obstacle.

Is it considered that the ground will hold more than it does?—Many
more; and a much larger amount of burials for a number of years.

What are the objections to the ground?—One objection among the
higher classes, and a very serious one, is that it is very wet.
After a grave has been dug, the water in it has risen, and the
coffin is lowered into the water.

Has there been any expenditure upon it for rendering it attractive
by planting or ornamenting it?—In former years it was planted with
trees or shrubs; but as compared with the cemeteries it cannot
pretend to any attractions.

Is there anything in the circumstances of the establishment of the
burial ground and chapel for St. James which do not render it a fair
example of any similar measure for an equivalent population in these
times?—There appear to be no circumstances to prevent it being
considered a fair example.

§ 108. The following is the account of the St. Martin’s suburban burial ground, given by Mr. Le Breton, the clerk to the guardians of the parish:—

What is the provision made for the burial of the poorer classes in
the parish of St. Martin-in-the-Fields?—The burial ground in
Drury-lane in 1804 was considered to be full, when four acres of
ground, situate at Camden-town, were purchased and used as a
cemetery. The plot was then in what was considered the country: the
distance of the spot is rather more than two miles from the
workhouse. Since its institution it has been completely surrounded
by houses, and they are now building close against the wall of the
burial ground. Originally it was designed as a better sort of burial
ground, but since loss has been incurred by it and it has not been
found to be attractive; two hundred pounds have recently been
expended upon it in planting it. Formerly it was so wet that when
persons went to funerals there they often found that the coffin was
let down several feet in water or mire. This created an unpleasant
sensation, and the ground was drained at a great expense into the
Fleet-ditch. The objection as to the wetness of the ground does not
now exist.

What have been the expenses, and the numbers of interments and
charges of the burial ground?—(The following statement was given in
answer to this question.)

The original cost of forming ground, &c., was about £2,000
The price is a perpetual rent-charge of, for the 4 acres, £100 = £3,000
per annum
Establishment Charges:—
Chaplain’s salary per annum £60
Sexton’s salary per annum £50
Keeping up ground by gardener £20
Paving rate per annum £30
Compensation to St. Pancras £5
The chaplain and sexton have houses to dwell in, which
are kept in repair, insured, and the taxes paid by the £30
parish at a considerable expense

A private Act of Parliament was obtained, but at what cost does not
appear.

The burial ground was formed in 1804, and the charges of it to this
date have exceeded £10,000 beyond the fees received.

_From 20th March, 1806, to 1st December, 1842._

Total number of burials at Camden-town since the formation of 10,982
the ground
Of these were non-parishioners 1,987
Of these were paupers 4,624
Of these were buried in the cheapest ground where 1,062
monuments are not allowed
All burials for St. Martin in the Fields, 1841 522
Registered deaths, 1841 589

Beyond the expense of the establishment, have any inconveniences
been the subject of complaint by the parishioners?—Yes; that the
hours appointed by the chaplain are not those most suited for
interments; that they are often driven off until late in the
evening, and in consequence of the time being limited the service is
performed in a hurried manner. In respect to position, the cemetery
appears to be convenient, and no one within the district complains
of any offence arising from it. My own view is that there ought to
be a central or some other supervision over cemeteries: if there be
not there will only be abuses and grounds of dissatisfaction.

Do you conceive that the experience of the parish of St. Martin, of
a separate parochial cemetery, is applicable as an index to the
general charge upon the rate-payers in the other parishes of the
metropolis, resulting from the simple prohibition of interments in
the town, and the permission to any two or more parishes to provide
cemeteries for; in other words, to the transference of burial
grounds from the centre of the town to the midst of the
suburbs?—Yes, I do consider it applicable: moreover, that at the
present time, it would be still more difficult to obtain sites
within a reasonable distance than it was in 1804: the expenses of
separate parochial grounds must therefore be much more considerable.

§ 109. The Rev. Wm. Stone, the rector of Spitalfields, whose position, as the minister of a large and populous parish, possessing one of the best managed places of burial in the metropolis, gives him peculiar opportunities of judging of the most advantageous administrative arrangements, and entitles his observations to peculiar weight, concludes his testimony in the following terms:—

1. As the clergyman of a poor and populous parish, I should regret
the necessity of imposing any additional rate upon my parishioners,
especially any one which was likely to be regarded as a church rate;
and I feel certain, that a rate assessed for the burial of the dead,
and collected under the authority of the rector and churchwardens,
would be so regarded. Under our present system, the burial of the
dead is a source of profit; it yields an annual surplus towards
defraying the other expenses of the church; and it thus conspires
with other circumstances to make the church-rate fall light upon my
parishioners. But in a population like mine any additional impost
would be felt; and confounded, as in such a population it certainly
would be, with church-rate, it might operate mischievously or even
fatally against the church establishment of my parish. The same
objection would apply in principle to all poor and populous
parishes. As a clergyman, too, I might add more personal
considerations; for, though the incumbent, as the only permanent
member of the committee of health, might have some local prominence
and weight, more, perhaps, than might everywhere be satisfactory to
dissenters; yet, in imposing pecuniary charges on his parishioners,
and levying penalties for the non-payment of those charges, he would
have duties unpopular enough to outweigh the advantage of any
distinction conferred on him.

2. If it is said, that a rate of 1_d._ in the pound would be too
light to be felt; it may be said also that it would be too much so
to answer its purpose. It is commonly calculated, that, in my
parish, a rate of 6_d._ in the pound realizes barely 500_l._, yet
the population to be provided with interment is above 20,000. And as
all the parishes about us are in much the same circumstances this
objection would apply equally to a union of parishes.

3. There is much that is objectionable in the proposed local
committees of health.

A local board would be less likely to possess the confidence of the
people. Indeed, it would be exposed to the influence of personal
interest and local partialities; and still more so, if the majority
of its members were in office for a year or two only. A board of
this kind may be said to exist already in my own parish, where a
local Act of Parliament places the burial ground in the hands of the
parish officers. And it is but a few years since my attention was
forcibly called to the insecurity of this local arrangement by one
of my parishioners. This parishioner, who was intimately and
practically acquainted with the working of our parochial system,
represented to me the necessity of adopting increased precautions
for the protection of our burial ground, “for,” said he, “a partial
or interested parish officer might do almost anything he pleased
with it;” and he proceeded to name an individual, who had even
intimated his intention to do so as soon as he should come into
office. There can be no doubt, indeed, that any individual might do
so. It is impossible to say, to what extent a tradesman so disposed
might oblige his friends and customers, and benefit himself; for as
senior officer of the year he would have the sole disposal of the
burial ground, and receive all payments for burials, private graves,
vaults, and the erection of monumental tablets, without any demand
upon those receipts, but a limited sum payable to the rector, and
without any inspective control over them but that of a board of
auditors chosen from his brother vestrymen. From my own observation,
I do not think that parish auditors are generally very accurate in
their investigations. But on a subject like the one in question,
they hardly could be so. Even supposing what is seldom, if ever, the
case, that they had a practical knowledge of the subject, and
conducted their investigations with the authorized table of fees
before them, they might in many instances be eluded. During the
first four years of my incumbency, the parish officers reported
their receipts for burials at the average amount of 215_l._ a-year,
which sum, after the deduction of 125_l._ secured to the rector,
left an annual surplus of 90_l._ At that time it was generally held
to be a point of official honour, that the amount of this surplus
should be kept secret out of doors. It was kept secret even from the
rector; and it may serve at once to show the impolicy of secrecy,
and the extent to which local authorities are distrusted, that my
predecessor always had his misgivings on the subject. Though
remarkable for the mildness and amiability of his disposition, he
could never surmise any more innocent misapplication of this
surplus, than that it was alienated from the church for the relief
of the poor rate.

A constant change in the majority of a local board would be most
unfavourable to uniformity of system, efficiency, and economy. Upon
this ground I believe the church to be a great loser by the office
of churchwarden. An individual charged with raising and expending
the ecclesiastical finances of a parish for a year only is little
likely to perform those duties as well as if he had a more permanent
authority. To say nothing of his having more temptation to
indolence, and to an ostentatious or interested profusion, he
labours under the unavoidable disadvantage of inexperience. By the
time that he becomes efficient in his office, he is called upon to
retire from it.

A local board would want many other advantages of a more publicly
constituted authority. Supplied with members by the casualties of
parochial office, it could not always command a high order of
intelligence. It would necessarily be limited in its opportunities
of observation; and, as it could not make its purchases and regulate
its current expenditure to the same advantage as if it acted on a
more extensive scale, it would, of course, prove less economical to
the public.

In fact, from all my local observation, I am led to hope that, in
removing the interment of the dead from populous towns, the
Legislature will adopt not a parochial but a comprehensive national
plan for the purpose.

Mr. Drew, the vestry clerk and superintendent registrar of Bermondsey, makes similar objections to the proposed machinery; that “the persons nominated to carry out such a measure in parishes would not be satisfactory to the inhabitants, even if they were disposed to act.”

Mr. Corder, the clerk to the Strand Union, was asked upon this subject—

What do you believe to be the prevailing opinion in your Union on
the subject of town interments?—I believe there is a strong and
growing opinion against the practice of interring in London and its
immediate environs. I believe that public feeling generally is
opposed to that custom, as being prejudicial to health, and often
more distressing to the feelings of the survivors than interments
would be in a more distant and less familiar and frequented spot.

Do you think the parishioners of London parishes would approve of
separate and distinct parochial cemeteries?—No, I think they would
prefer having one or more cemeteries on a very extensive scale to
having parochial cemeteries which, in the neighbourhood of the
metropolis, would, I think, be found almost impracticable.

Do you think that parishes generally would object to the expense of
providing cemeteries?—I think that if separate parochial cemeteries
were established, the expense incurred would be so serious as to
induce parishes almost to submit to the evils resulting from town
interments rather than incur so heavy an expenditure. One of the
advantages of having one or more cemeteries on a large scale would
be that the expense would be thereby proportionably and very
considerably diminished.

George Downing, a mechanic, and secretary to a burial society, it will be found, represents sentiments extensively prevalent amongst persons of his own class in the metropolis.

Do you conceive that any arrangements for the improvement of
interments would be carried on more acceptably to the labouring
classes if they were conducted by officers connected with the
parish, or by a larger and superior agency?—The working people would
sell their beds from under them sooner than have any parish
funerals: it is heart-rending to them, and they would prefer any
other officers to the parish officers.

Do you find that they are prepared to have interments in the towns
prohibited?—Yes, it has been very much debated upon since the scenes
in the churchyards are made known, and they wish the bill to be
carried. I am confident that every man in our club would petition to
have the bill carried, so that such scenes may be put a stop to. I
find the opinion of the working men on the subject is quite
universal about it. They expect that Government will provide the
grounds and some means of conveyance.

Mr. Dix was asked—

Is it the expectation of the labouring and poorer classes that large
public cemeteries will be provided?—Yes, that I think is the general
opinion.

Do you conceive that large cemeteries, on a national scale, will be
more acceptable to the labouring classes than parochial burial
grounds, whether in the present grounds or in burial grounds in the
suburbs of the metropolis?—I think the national cemeteries will be
much more popular.

If the burials of the working population could be performed in the
more ornamented and attractive cemeteries, such as those at Highgate
and Kensal Green, at the same expense as in any of the grounds
within the town, would there be any who would not be buried there?—I
think very few.

Unequivocal proof is given of the dispositions of the labouring classes in this respect by the fact that the number of interments of persons of those classes in cemeteries is increasing, even under increased charges. For example, on examining the mortuary registries of the Westminster cemetery, to see what were the class of persons interred, it appeared that the majority of the persons interred in that, which is the cemetery most heavily charged with burial fees, was of the labouring classes from St. George’s, Hanover-square. The fees for interment, in the suburban burial ground in the Bayswater-road, belonging to their own parish, were 15_s._; and interments in the trading burial grounds might have been obtained at lower rates: but the fees paid for interment at the more distant cemetery are 30_s._ for each burial. The registries contained similar evidence in an increasing number of interments of the labouring classes from immediately adjacent suburban parishes, such as Chelsea, Brompton, and Kensington, of a disposition to make sacrifices, to obtain interments in places that are more free from offensive associations to them than those which attach to the parochial burial grounds.

Mr. Wild was asked—

So far as your experience goes, does the practice of interment in
cemeteries result from motives of economy or from choice of
situation?—From choice of situation, or from dislike of the
parochial burial-grounds; in nine cases out of ten from preference
of the situation and mode of interment in cemeteries; the choice
would indeed be general, if it were not for the increased charges
made by undertakers. The undertakers have generally increased the
funeral charges at the cemeteries above one-third. The number of men
taken out, whose whole day is occupied, make up the increased
charge.

You state, that but for the increased charge, the custom of
interment in cemeteries would be general; has the strength of the
attachments to the parochial churchyards diminished?—Yes, under the
recent inquiries and exposures of the state of the churchyards they
have almost vanished. But at no time was the attachment to the
parochial churchyards in town so strong as in the country. In the
country, even the poorer classes will pay the sexton a fee of from
1_s._ 6_d._ to 2_s._ 6_d._, for “keeping up the grave.” This cannot
be the case in the towns for want of space; parties who appoint
their places of burial, generally select a place on account of its
quiet.

Do you believe that the wish to be buried where kindred are buried,
is, or would continue to be stronger, than a desire to be buried in
well-provided cemeteries?—No; this is shewn by the increasing
frequency with which parties who have family vaults, desire to be
buried in the cemeteries. Very recently I performed the funeral of a
lady belonging to a family who had a vault in a church at
Westminster—her husband had been buried in it. By her will she
desired to be buried at Kensal Green, and she had requested that if
the churchyard at Westminster was closed, her husband’s remains
might be brought and placed next to hers in the cemetery. There were
other members of the family besides her husband buried in the family
vault. Such instances are now becoming very frequent.

Inasmuch as interments in cemeteries have generally increased the
charges of interment, is it not to be apprehended that unless some
regulations on a larger scale than of small localities be adopted,
the inconvenience arising in towns will increase the charges of
these calamities to the poorest of the middle classes and to the
working classes, not to speak of the charges on the poor’s rates,
for the interments of paupers will also be increased by
districts?—Yes; it has occurred to me that it will be so.

He expresses his conviction, however, that so strong is the feeling at present against parochial interments, that if there should be no legislative provision or interference for the public protection, the parochial burial places being left open to the competition of private and trading burial grounds, in a very short time not one-third of the present number of burials would take place in the parochial grounds.

§ 110. The expense to the rate-payers of parishes for the transference of the interments to the suburbs would be necessarily very high; the expense of numerous separate parochial establishments, if only on the scale of the establishments for the performance of the funeral ceremony, and for such imperfect care of the ground as that given in those described would be, at the least, between 25 and 30,000_l._ per annum. The proposed regulation of the distance of cemeteries from human habitations—that they shall in every case be two miles, not from houses, but from the metes and bounds of London and Westminster, and “of any other city, town, or borough,” as defined by the Municipal Act, and “which shall contain more than 500 houses, the occupiers of which shall be rated to the relief of the poor more than 10_l._ or upwards,” appear to be made without any local examination, or reference to proper observations or experience.—Vide post, §§ 162, 163, and 164. The metes and bounds of several towns and places include common lands and sites, sufficiently distant from any collections of houses, to be the most eligible sites, and suitable soils for cemeteries, which according to the best ascertained rule, should be at distances proportioned to the numbers of inhabitants and probable burials, varying according to these numbers, from 150 to 500 paces. All unnecessary increase of distance must be attended with proportionately increased charges of interment to the poorer classes: arrangements for preventing an increase of the expense of conveyance of the remains to distant places of interment, though practicable under general regulations for large national cemeteries, would be impracticable on the plan of numerous places of interment with small separate establishments. Mr. Jeffryes, an undertaker, who chiefly inters the poorest classes in the Whitechapel district, where the _parochial_ interments are generally diminishing, was more particularly questioned on this topic.

What has been your experience in respect to the interment of people
of the working classes at cemeteries, and at a distance from their
residence, as compared with burials near their residence? At what
cemeteries have you interred persons?—At Mr. Barber Beaumont’s
cemetery, which is about a mile and a half from Whitechapel; and
also at the cemetery which is at the Cambridge Heath, Cambridge
Road. I have attended, but not on my own account, funerals at all
the other cemeteries—Highgate, Kensal Green, and others.

Supposing that interments within towns be prohibited for all
classes, and that funerals for the future must be performed beyond
the gas lamps or the pavements; judging from the cases you have
already had, what must be the effect on the funerals of the
labouring classes;—supposing that no other arrangements are made
than that of allowing parishes, or any two of them, to provide
cemeteries at a distance from town?—It will certainly increase the
expenses to the labouring classes, and increase the expenses to the
parishes generally. I perform funerals for the working classes at
one-third less than most others; yet I find that the extra expense
of a funeral only a mile or a mile and a quarter distance, is about
one pound per funeral extra; this consists chiefly of the extra
expense of conveyance.

Have you seen carriage conveyances or hearses for the conveyance of
bodies to the cemeteries without the use of bearers?—Yes, I have:
but to get a coffin out of the house, which sometimes has to be got
down stairs, and is very heavy, four men at the least will be
required, and then four men will be required to take it from the
hearse at the cemetery, so that men’s labour cannot be much less,
even if they provide bearers at the cemeteries, which is talked of:
there will still be the extra expense of the carriage, whatever that
is.

§ 111. From the practical evidence already cited, §§ 87, 88, it will be perceived, that notwithstanding this increase of expense, the chaplain or curate, if unaided, cannot be expected to perform the service in a manner that will be more satisfactory to the survivors than in those parochial grounds which are now the subject of complaint. The numerous successive services that may be expected to arrive on the Sunday must often unavoidably have the appearance of being hurried over, and without assistance and appropriate superintendence will sometimes really be so, whilst the funeral of the person of better condition which takes place separately, and at an appointed time, has its separate attention under circumstances, giving rise to the appearance and creating the feeling of an undue “acceptation of persons,” which it is said ought not to be, and which the examination of practical examples will show, need not be. Inasmuch as, in the present mode, the clergyman’s attention must be absorbed with his own clerical duties, the grave-yard and the material offices connected with it must be left to be managed, as it is now, by a sexton and common gravedigger. No multiplication of the numbers of such poor men in numerous extra-mural and parochial establishments will give them education, or elevate their minds to act without superintendence, up to the solemnity and delicacy of the duties to be performed in any proposed alteration of custom. In such hands the institution and service for the reception and care of the dead, (which, with all its appliances, is one of the most elevated that can adorn the civic economy of a large and civilized community,) would be impracticable, or would become a common “dead-house,” or a revolting charnel. It may be confidently affirmed, that to accomplish what is needed to satisfy the feelings of the population, on the points on which they are so painfully susceptible, and to gain the public confidence requisite to carry out all the sanitary appliances and improvements that are requisite in connexion with the practice of interment, would task the zeal and ability, and unremitting attention of any, the best staff of educated medical men that could be procured for such a service. The improvements which appear to be practicable, may be perceived on a consideration of the information hereafter submitted, as to what is already gained under arrangements of a comprehensive character.

§ 112. The chief conclusions in respect to the proposed suburban parochial interments deducible from the present experience appear then to be,

1. That the change of the practice of interments on the plan of suburban parochial or establishments of separate unions of parishes, while it gave immediate relief to the centre of the town, would create impediments to the regular growth of the suburbs, and, ultimately, as the interments increase, diminish the salubrity of the suburbs. §§ 107, 108.

2. That it would not _ultimately_ diminish any injurious effects arising from the practice of interments amidst the abodes of the living; and that its chief effect would be to transfer such evils from the districts where they now prevail to the midst of the population of other districts. §§ 105, 110.

3. That these results would only be obtained at a considerable expense to the rate-payers of the parishes from whence the practice of interments is transferred. §§ 107, 108.

4. That if burial in parochial grounds were transferred to such a distance as not to interfere with the growth of the suburbs, the increased distance of interments would occasion a proportionate increase of the expense of interments to the labouring classes of the community. § 110.

5. That inasmuch as the difficulty of obtaining the means of defraying the expense of such classes of interments is frequently a powerful means of increasing the evil of the long delay of the interments, the measures proposed would tend to increase the most extensive and direct source of injury to the health and morals of the survivors of the labouring classes—the long retention of the corpse in their crowded and ill-ventilated places of abode. §§ 43, 44.

6. That interment by a parochial agency would aggravate or leave untouched the other objections to the present practice of interments in the metropolis. §§ 98, 99, 111.

_Practicability of ensuring for the Public superior Interments at
reduced Expenses._

The subject which may next be presented for consideration is how far the pecuniary burthens may be reduced consistently with the sentiments expressed by Jeremy Taylor, who deems it “a great act of piety, and honourable, to inter our friends and relatives according to the proportions of their condition, and so to give testimony of our hope of their resurrection. So far is piety; beyond, it may be the ostentation and bragging of grief to serve worse ends. In this, as in everything else, as our piety must not pass into superstition or vain expense, so neither must the excess be turned into parsimony, and chastised by negligence and impiety to the memory of their dead.”

§ 113. It appears, from detailed inquiries, made of tradesmen of experience and respectability, who have answered explicitly the questions put to them, that the expense of the materials at present supplied for funerals admit of a reduction under general arrangements of, at the least, 50 per cent. The practical experience of these witnesses would justify a dependence on their testimony as to the possible reduction of expenses, especially in case the public feeling should be gained to change from the practice of having processions through the town to the practice of processions nearer to the cemeteries, by which the expenses of conveyance included in Mr. Wild’s estimate would be diminished. It is stated by the latter that the disposition evinced by the higher classes, is to reduce expensive trappings. He states:—

Is it not an occurrence of increasing frequency amongst the
respectable classes to express in their wills a wish to be buried
plainly, and at moderate expense?—Yes, it is; and they sometimes fix
sums. They fix such a sum as £150, where it has been usual to expend
such sums as £400 or £500. Parties of respectability now begin to
object to wearing cloaks and long hatbands. They are also beginning
to object to the use of feathers, and to the general display. The
system of performing funerals by written contract is also becoming
very prevalent. It is so frequent with me that I must have some
printed forms.

Mr. J. Browning of Manchester, member of the large society alluded to, as comprehending 150,000 members, states that they have evinced similar tendencies.

I have belonged to the Odd Fellows’ Society and to the Foresters’
Society, and have served office in both in this town, Manchester. I
have belonged to them about 13 years.

Do you find any alteration in the dispositions of the members of
those societies in respect to the ceremonies observed and the array
at funerals?—Yes, a very great alteration.

In what respect?—In Manchester and Liverpool it used to be the
practice, when a member of either society died, that the members and
the officers attended decorated with their regalia, and followed the
corpse in procession. They used to assemble in bodies, as many as
two or three hundred, and there was a great deal of drinking. Now
these sort of processions are put a stop to by members, and there is
no regalia or processions used. Only a few members attend the
deceased member, and they attend only with black scarfs, white
gloves, and a black silk hatband, which is considered respectful.
But in some of the country places they still follow the practice,
and they will have the processions.

But the general tendency is to render the ceremony more simple?—Yes,
and there is much less drinking in the towns.

§ 114. These manifestations are ascribable to a consciousness of the incompatibility of funereal displays through the crowded streets of populous districts, and are consistent with the desire to obtain proper respect for the deceased, shown in the objections to brief, meagre, and hurried services, and in the selection of secluded and decorated places of burial; it is shown, indeed, by the removal of the meretricious trappings, which have lost their effect, and the preference of a more quiet simplicity which, under such circumstances, forms a better means of ensuring that respect.

§ 115. Assuming the practicability of the accomplishment in this country of administrative arrangements such as have been accomplished, and are in habitual execution, abroad, to the great satisfaction of every class of society, a primary regulation, which would be practicable, would be to obtain for the public the opportunity of obtaining, at various scales, supplies of goods and services for funerals. To Mr. Wild the following questions were put:—

Do you believe it to be practicable, by proper regulations, greatly
to reduce the existing charges of interments?—Yes, a very great
reduction indeed may be made—at least 50 per cent.

May it be confidently stated that under such reductions, whatever of
respectability in exterior is now attached to the trapping, or to
the mode of the ceremony, might be preserved?—Oh, yes; I should say
it might, and that they could scarcely fail to be increased.

Might not the expenses of the funerals of _the labouring classes_ be
greatly reduced without any reduction of the solemnity, or display
of proper and satisfactory respect?—Very considerable reductions may
be made, and attention to propriety very greatly increased. One
large item of expense is the expense of bearers: they cost, for a
walking funeral of an adult, 12_s._ Nine shillings of this expense
would be dispensed with if the burial were at a cemetery. This would
go towards the expense of conveyance, and contribute to the
compensation: besides, it would avoid for the mourners the
inconvenience and annoyance of walking through the crowded streets,
often in wet weather. One circumstance attending burial in
cemeteries would be, a diminution of the number of mourners: this
would occasion a diminution of the expense of funeral fittings.

What is the lowest price for which a coffin is made?—The lowest
priced coffin at this time, is the adult pauper’s coffin, with a
shroud, but with no cloth or nails, or name-plate or handles, and
costs 3_s._ 6_d._; the contract is usually for deal, inch thick, but
they never are; if they were, they could not be supplied under
4_s._; they often break when taken to the grave.

What would be the price of a coffin deemed respectable by the
labouring classes, with name-plate and appropriate fittings
complete, if manufactured for an extensive supply?—The average price
of such coffins is now about 35_s._; but the same quality of coffin
might be supplied on a large scale for about 17_s._

What would be the price of coffins for persons of the middle class,
if supplied on a similar scale?—The prices vary with them from 3_l._
to 10_l._; they have frequently double coffins; the same coffins
might be supplied from 30_s._ to 5_l._, or 50 per cent. less.

§ 116. Mr. Hewitt, whose testimony has already been referred to, states, that under general arrangements, it would be practicable to alleviate the evil of the expense to an extent which would appear incredible. He says—

I have so far carefully considered the subject, that I should be
ready to take a contract for the performance of burials at the
following rates:—For a labouring man, 1_l._ 10_s._ without burial
fees; for a labourer’s child, 15_s._, for a tradesman, 2_l._ 2_s._;
for a tradesman’s child, 1_l._ 1_s._; for a gentleman, 6_l._ 7_s._
6_d._; for a gentleman’s child, 3_l._ 10_s._ These expenses are for
“walking funerals;” the expenses of hearses and carriages would
depend on the distance, and would make from one to two guineas each
carriage extra.

All these, with the same descriptions of coffins, and with the same
respectability of attendance?—Yes, on the scale of about half the
existing burials in the metropolis; if it were for the whole, it
might be done much better, and in some instances perhaps at a
greater rate of reduction.

§ 117. Mr. Wild gives, on similar grounds, the following estimate of the practicable rates of expenses of interment with all decent appliances:—

─────────┬───────────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────── │ Tradespeople. │ Mechanics. ─────────┼───────────────┬───────────────┼───────────────┬─────────────── │ Adults. │ Children. │ Adults. │ Children. ─────────┼───────┬───────┼───────┬───────┼───────┬───────┼───────┬─────── │ From. │ To. │ From. │ To. │ From. │ To. │ From. │ To. ─────────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼─────── │£. _s._│£. _s._│£. _s._│£. _s._│£. _s._│£. _s._│£. _s._│£. _s._ Coffin │ 1 5│ 4 4│ 0 15│ 1 10│ 0 17│ 1 5│ 0 10│ 0 15 Fittings,│ 0 15│ 2 0│ 0 10│ 1 0│ 0 10│ 0 15│ 0 5│ 0 10 &c. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Sundries │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Convey- │ 1 1│ 4 4│ 1 1│ 2 2│ 0 17│ 1 1│ 0 10│ 1 1 ance │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ ─────────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼───────┼─────── Totals │ 3 1│10 8│ 2 6│ 4 12│ 2 4│ 3 1│ 1 5│ 2 6 ─────────┴───────┴───────┴───────┴───────┴───────┴───────┴───────┴───────

§ 118. Next to the arrangements practicable for the regulation of the supplies of goods, the most important practicable arrangements for reduction of expense are those which may regulate the services necessary for interments. The item set forth in the above estimate of the charge for conveyance is on the supposition of separate conveyance in the present mode to the distant cemetery. With reference to the charge for the poorer classes, Mr. Wild was asked—

Might not several sets of mourners be carried in one
conveyance?—Yes; that has often occurred to me, and it would tend to
reduce the expense materially. When two or three children have died
in one street, and they have had to be buried in the same cemetery,
I have asked the parents whether, as they had to go to the same
place, they objected to go in the same conveyance, and they have
frequently stated that they had no objections. These were of the
more respectable classes of mechanics.

In the fittings up of the coffins, is it considered that these would
be as good as those now used?—Quite as good.

§ 119. One large item in the expense of funerals in the metropolis and populous districts is the expense of hearers, § 115, who are provided for each separate funeral. This expense is about 12_s._ for a set of bearers for the funeral of an adult of the working classes. Formerly common bearers were provided by the several parishes in the metropolis. Any arrangements of a national character would include the provision of a better regulated class of bearers at a greatly reduced expense. In the course of the examination of Mr. Dix, the following information was elicited:—

It has been suggested that, if the hearse were always used, the
expense of bearers would be dispensed with in walking funerals. What
do you conceive would be the case?—I conceive that that would not be
the case, inasmuch as it would require bearers to remove the body
from the house to the hearse, and from the hearse to the grave. But
this difficulty might, I would suggest, be, to a great extent,
obviated by the establishment of public bearers, who should have the
exclusive right of removing all corpses, and whose rate of payment
should be fixed.

What is the present rate of payment of bearers to the grave for the
labouring classes?—It is 2_s._ 6_d._ each.

If public bearers were appointed, what might be the expense?—Much
less than one-half.

Do you think that this principle of management would be satisfactory
to the working classes?—It is in fact an old method. Formerly there
were bearers in all parishes, appointed by the churchwardens. In the
parish of St. Margaret’s, Westminster, and in most of the city
parishes, the practice continues to this day. In the form of bills
of the various parish dues the charge for bearers remains to the
present day.

Were these parish bearers less expensive than others?—No; they were
not.

Why were they discontinued?—In consequence of these bearers often
becoming undertakers themselves, which created a jealousy amongst
the trade, who refused to employ them, and the parishes had no power
to compel their employment. Also in consequence of the men being
elected by the churchwardens; they were seldom elected until they
became of an age that rendered them incapable of performing the
duties properly. They were not properly dressed, and were under no
control. In recommending public bearers, I presume they would be
under a different control than a parochial one or than the
churchwardens. I would add, however, that as one set of bearers
cannot carry a corpse more than a mile, I would only propose them in
aid of the hearses.

§ 120. Mr. Wild, who had previously volunteered the suggestion as to the means of reducing the expenses of conveyance, by arrangements on an extensive scale, observes, further, in reference to the bearers—

“My first view as to the possible economy of funerals, was derived
from seeing that parish bearers were often made use of. The present
charge for bearers for mechanics is 12_s._ for the adults, or 3_s._
per bearer. I was asking one of the parish bearers what he was
allowed, as the charge was included in the burial dues, which were
1_l._ 5_s._ 6_d._ He told me they were paid 6_d._ per bearer, or
2_s._ the set. He told me that they had borne six to the grave that
morning, and he had earned 3_s._ himself. This at the usual charge
would have been 3_l._ 12_s._; but properly provided bearers at the
cemetery might reduce the charges still further, perhaps to 3_d._
each case.”

§ 121. Before submitting for consideration any detailed arrangements for securing, in a manner satisfactory to the people, better funerals at less oppressive charges, it is necessary to premise, that there appear to be no grounds to expect the extensive spontaneous adoption of improved regulations by the labouring classes without aid _ab extra_. The labour of communicating information to them, to be attended to at the time it is wanted, would be immense. Their sources of information on the occurrence of such events are either poor neighbours, as ignorant as themselves, or persons who are interested in misleading them and profiting by their ignorance, to continue expensive and mischievous practices. As against such an evil as the undue retention of the bodies amidst the living the usual mode of effecting a change would be simply by a prohibitory ordinance, § 91, of which information would be conveyed practically by the enforcement of penalties for disobedience of the law, which it is assumed they know. The appointment of a responsible agency, which would be respected, to convey the information of what may be deemed requisite for the protection of the living and exercise influence to initiate a change of practice, appears to all the practical witnesses examined, § 102, to be a preferable course, as being the most suitable to the temper of the people, and as being the least expensive, as well as the most efficient. The very desolate and unprotected condition of the survivors of the poorest classes, on the occurrence of a death in large towns, appears to render some intervention for their guidance and protection at that moment peculiarly requisite, as a simple act of beneficence. Mr. Wild was asked—

Amongst the poorer classes, is not the widow often made ill during
the protracted delay of the burial?—Yes, very often. They have come
to me in tears, and begged for accommodation, which I have given
them. On observing to them, you seem very ill; a common reply is,
“Yes, I feel very ill. I am very much harassed, and I have no one to
assist me.” I infer from such expressions that the mental anxiety
occasioned by the expense, and want of means to obtain the money, is
the frequent cause of their illness. My opinion is, that unless the
undertaker gave two-thirds of them time or accommodation for
payment, they would not be able to bury the dead at all.

You state that they have no persons to assist them; do they
frequently, or ever, on such occasions, see any persons of
education, or of influence, from whom they might receive aid or
advice?—I never hear of such persons unless they happen to be
connected with some local association, when the survivors are
visited and get advice, and sometimes relief.

If any gentleman were to visit them as a public officer, as the
officer of a board of health, would his recommendations have
influence with them?—Very great: the doctor now has the greatest
influence with them, but he does not attend them after the death.

John Downing, a mechanic, the secretary of a Burial Society, whose duty it was to visit the remains of the deceased members, was asked—

After the death of the party have you ever, in visiting the
deceased, met any professional person or any gentleman attending to
give advice or consolation to the widow?—No. Never to my knowledge.

Then on what advice will the widow act on the occurrence of a
death?—On the advice of the poor people in the neighbourhood, or of
any friends or relatives that may chance to call upon them; but I
never knew either medical man or minister attend professionally to
give advice or consolation.

Is any notice of the death sent to the minister?—The working-classes
never think of that; the first thing and the only thing thought of
by them is to scrape together the money for the funeral.

Do you think that a medical officer, an officer of public health,
attending gratuitously to inspect the body and register the cause of
death, and to give advice as to the proper means of conducting the
funeral, and the steps to be taken for the health of the living
would be respectfully received and have influence?—I am very
confident that he would have a very hearty welcome. I think a deal
of benefit would be derived from it to the feelings as well as the
health of the parties.

§ 122. The curate of a populous district mentioned to me, as illustrative of the practice in the crowded neighbourhoods in the metropolis, that he had for a time lived in a house let off in lodgings to respectable persons in the middle ranks of life, and though his profession was known in the house, yet three deaths had taken place in it of which he had no notice whatever, and only knew of them at the time of the funeral. All the witnesses who have had experience amongst the labouring classes, concur in the expression of confidence that the visits and intervention of a public officer would at such a time be well received by the poorest classes.

Mr. Hewitt was asked—

Do you conceive that respectable officers visiting the house of all
classes of the deceased immediately after the death, as medical
officers and officers of public health, to inquire as to the causes
of death and register them, would long fail to acquire powerful
influence in the suggestion of voluntary and beneficial sanitary
arrangements?—I think that an officer appointed from the first class
of physicians would be better received than a local medical man—as
an officer of the public health, whose opinions would be more
prized, and consequently would be sure to be received by all most
respectfully. Such an officer is calculated to do more good than can
easily be conceived, and would be able to execute such duties over
an extensive district.

Would they have that sort of faith in a physician that they would
not have in any local medical officer?—They would receive well any
gentleman, and would act upon his advice.

On the occurrence of a death, is there any one person of education,
or of superior condition in life, who comes near the working
classes?—Not one that I am aware; no one attends for such a purpose;
if any such person comes it must be accidental.

It may perhaps be presumed that it is rare that any death occurs
without some medical man or medical officer having attended the
case?—Very few, and in those cases inquests are usually held.

In the majority of cases, therefore, the labouring classes, on the
occurrence of a death, are left either to the advice of any
interested person who may come amongst them, or to the influence of
their equally uninformed neighbours?—Yes, certainly, that is the
case.