View report page

2
(5.) In view of the fact that within Greater London are burial grounds not included among those
containing the 1300 acres of ground referred to, the periods of time in the table headed Greater London
are too small; while for the reason that this ground will doubtless receive the bodies of many
persons not resident in the Administrative County of London, the periods of time stated in the table
under the heading Administrative County are too large. It is probable also that the longest period
of time in each table more nearly approaches accuracy than the shortest period of time for the reasons
that an acre could contain 1,200 graves measuring 9 feet by 4 feet, or 36 square feet, and that 1,000
graves per acre is a more accurate estimate of the extent to which burial grounds will eventually be
used than is 500 graves per acre. The above figures, moreover, do not include the numerous existing
graves which will for many years be used for interment.
(6.) In considering whether it is expedient that any further regulations should be made in respect
to burial grounds in the interest of health and decency it is obvious that it would be well, so far as
this is practicable by regulations, to promote the adoption of practices that will ensure the speedy
dissolution of the body. Thus every encouragement should be given to the use of perishable
coffins in earth graves. The time has, moreover, come when advance should be made upon the system
of interment in vaults and brick graves. The intention of their use is obviously to preserve the body
for as long a time as possible; the interest of the community is to ensure the dissolution of the body
in as short a time as possible. The requirement that bodies interred in vaults and brick graves shall
be enclosed in lead coffins has no doubt the object of retaining the gases of decomposition as well as of
preserving the remains. I have been told, however, that it is a common experience that these efforts
are often futile, and that lead coffins from time to time burst from the pressure of accumulated gases.
I have myself known of a lead coffin being punctured by an undertaker to obviate this risk. It is
assuredly not an unreasonable demand that the provision of new brick graves and vaults in burial
grounds in London should cease.
(7.) For similar reasons the burial of bodies in clay is highly objectionable. Burial in a clay soil
tends, as Dr. Young says, to the preservation of the body or "the products of decomposition pass into
a liquid form which may be retained within the limits of the grave for an indefinite period, if no
means of drainage of the grave exist." I do not believe that public sentiment would be satisfied with
burial in clay if its unsuitability for this purpose were better understood.
(8.) Beyond this the present system of interment in common graves is not calculated to meet the
requirements of a reasonable sentiment. I refer to the "open grave" which is not closed until it has
been filled with the numerous bodies it has been dug to receive.
(9.) It is seen, however, from Dr. Young's report that custom in respect to method of interment is
changing, that brick graves are less frequently demanded than before, that, although yet in small
proportions, perishable coffins are preferred to coffins of oak and elm, and that the practice of cremation
has made a distinct beginning and is increasing year by year. The public is learning by degrees that
the thought of preserving the remains must be abandoned, and that the speedy dissolution of the body
into its constituent elements must be facilitated and not retarded.
(10.) The experience of Sir Seymour Haden and Dr. Vivian Poore of the burial of the bodies of
animals near the surface shows the rapidity with which dissolution of the body is effected when thus
buried,and undoubtedly it would be well to learn how far it would be practicable to adopt this method
as a means of disposing of the dead, for what may be done with isolated bodies in a country district
might not perhaps be found possible with numerous bodies in a London burial ground.
(11.) Dr. Young has made an estimate of the amount of suitable land which would be required for
the dead of the London population if surface burial were adopted, and he finds that fifty-five acres, or,
with land for paths and an unburied-in belt, some seventy acres would be required annually, and the
land could be again utilised after the necessary interval of time, which Sir Seymour Haden shows to
be proportionate to the depth below the surface at which interment takes place. Similar estimate for
Greater London shows that about eighty acres would be required for the number of deaths which now
occur in a year, with an increase of about 1.7 per cent, per annum to allow for increase of
population.
(12.) If it were intended to encourage the adoption of methods of interment under natural conditions,
which aim at the speedy dissolution of the body, much no doubt could be done if a representative body
in each county were authorised to make regulations which put limitations upon the continuance of
practices aiming at or leading to the preservation of the body. Such regulations would tend to
guide public opinion, and might, as this grows in the proper direction, be strengthened from time
to time.
(13.) More speedy results would no doubt be attained if the ownership of all burial grounds
were vested in public authorities who would not be influenced, as trading companies might be, in
the retention of customs which it is desirable should cease. Especially, if it were determined to give
facilities for surface interment, would it be desirable that ground so utilized should be in public
ownership.
Shirley F. Murphy,
Medical Officer oj Health.