The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-03-20 00:00:00

THE NORTH ERN TIMES.---LIVERPOOL, FRI DAY.

THE NECROPOLIS.

THE GOVERNMENT ENQUIRY.

The adjourned enquiry in reference to the Necropolis
burial ground was resumed in the Chancellor's court, in
St. George's ball, yesterday morning, at eleven o'clock
As on the former occasions, Mr. M'Gowan and Mr. Fresh
represented the Liverpool Health Committee. Mr. Lace
appeared on behalf of the trustees of the Necropolis,
The Government Inspector, Dr. Holland, having taken
his seat, and disposed of a few preliminary matters.
Mr. M.Gowan said he had had some receirts placed in
his hands by persons who had purchased private graves in
the Necropolis, who complained that those graves had
been used as common graves. If it was the commis-
sioner's wish, he would prove them ; but, as he had
already submitted several cases of a similar kind, and
aiven evidence upon such cases, he did not think it would
be necessary.
The Commissioner replied that he was of the same
sopicion.
Mr. McGowan said that last night they had left off with
the case of Mr. V and he had one or two little facts
in connection with it that he would prove.
Mr. Towers, the proprietor of the Angel Hotel, was
then called. He said—Mr. V-- died at my house.
His death was occasioned by a bale of cotton falling
upon him. An inquest was held on the body. Mr. V.'s
brother conferred with me as to the funeral, and I under.
stood that he had purchased a piece of ground at the
Necropolis as a private grave. I did not hear anything
as to its being a two grave ; I understood that it was a
private grave. I have a clear recollection that the grave
was from ',en to twelve feet deep. The brother caused a
mime:lent to be erected over the deceased'i grave. It
ly as treated as a private grave I obtained tenders for
the monument. It cost .£24, which the brother paid.
Grave digger Joseph Carl was again called. He had
heard all the evidence that had been given yesterday.
That given by Smith was correet.
Inspector : Who gave you orders?
Carl : He did all that had been done by the order of
Simpson.
Sexteret Simpson admitted that Carl had received
'orders from him. He should say that about 240 or 250
private graves had been broken up to make public
raves. They did not disturb many bodies ; perhaps one,
as the bodies had become decomposed, and had sunk down.
He was not always employed at the works, but super-
intended them. I-fe received his orders through Mr.
itirkus, from the board. to clear the land.
By Mr. Lace : It was perceptible that the bodies were
decomposed, and that they could be removed without any
indecency. He did not know who it was that first
suggested that the ground should he cleared. He did
not think it was his own. They were m king a path,
and it was then etiggested that this piece of ground
should be taken in. He and Mr. Kirkus talked it over,
end then it Was communicated to the committee, as he
believed, as, he afterwards received the order to do so
'from bTin. He had never heard any swearing over the
bodies except by Smith. He had seen Smith behave with
a good deal of roughness. It is the habit of the man.
Mr. M.Gowan : He was not so polished as persons in
a drawing room.
Simpson : No. The interments were conducted with the
greatest decency and propriety. In cases in which a body
might he removed, they were put into a preparatory
grave—that is, a grave that it was not intended for them
to remain in, and there remained, until it was put in'o
anothfr. It remained there until it was put into a
deeper grave, because parties did not like to have the
bodies put into a deeper grave. They might remain
there until the next morning. He had never known the
removal or bodies from a private grave 'o a public grave,
except when the parties had so'''d the private grave, or it
had been sold with their consent. There had been
removals from a public grave to a private grave when
the parties had wished it.
By the Inspector : He knew of' instances where other
bodies had to be removed to get at the body that was
required.
By Mr. McGowan : The worst I can say of Smith is,
that he was a rough man in the cases of removals, and he
was in the habit of swearing.. He did not find anything
unpleasant in theta Cases of removals. He did not assist
in the removal,a of the decomposed bodies. It was Smith's
delight tq work at these old graves, because he did not
like ‘4,11 work on the hard rock. The friends were never
'..eked, in the case of putting bodies into the preparatory,
whether they liked to have deep graves. People do not
like either shallow or deep graves. They liked them
about five or six feet, which was about the depth of the
preparatory grave. The practice of removing bodies
from single graves did not begin until this plan came
out. It would not answer to have a single grave for £l.
lie received his orders to carry out this plan from Mr.
Kirkus. This plan began in 1834, about the middle of
the summer, and continued until January last, but is now
discontinued. Daring that period all the common burials
took place after this fashion. He could not say how
many burials had taken place in that way, but he should
say about twelve a week. He could say that no removal
of bodies from private graves took place, unless he had
been told by Mr Kirkus that there had been a sale.
By the Inspector : He understood that ashen the grave
was sold by the friends, that the grave and everything—
the body was sold. He conceived that when a grave was
sold, he had authority to remove any remains that might
be in his way. He was told that the friends did noecare
about it. He did not get any express permission from
the friends to remove those bodies.
Mr. McGowan : I will now ask Mr. Lace to show me
the resolution of the board, authorising the breaking up
of the old graves.
Mr. Lace: These is the book—you can find it, if it is
there—but, unless you mention a specific date, I can't
find it out of so many—but I will tell you that I am
instructed, and I do not believe, that there is a resolution
to that effect in the book.
Mr. McGowan : Have you looked for it ?

Mr. Lace : I tell you, to the best of my belief, there
is no such a resolution. I know of no such resolution.

It was then agreed that the book should be given to
Mr. M‘Gowan to inspect, and if he found any particular
entry on the subject, he was to communicate with Mr.
Lace on the matter.

Mr. M'Gowan : Will you tell me the rate of dividend
that has been paid f.r the last four er five years.
Mr. Lace declined answering the question, not con-
ceiv ng it was revelant to the present investigation, and
said, it might only tend to bring something on, but be had
no objection to give the information to the commis-
sioner .

This concluded the case, as far as the production of
evidence was concerned.

Mr. Lace, on the part of the trustees, then rose to
address some observations to the commissioners, but he
spoke in such a low tone of voice, as at times to be almost
inaudible to the reporters. He was, however, understood
to say, that this case had branched out in so many
directions, since it was first commenced, that if he was to
reply on each branch, he was afraid that it would occupy
so much time, that it would not allow the Commissioner
to get away by the four o'clock train ; therefore, he
should only confine himself to the principal charges ;
but before doing that, he would beg to express. on the
part of the trustees, the very deep regret they felt at the
disclosures that had come out during the enquiry, and to
say that whatever has been done, has been done entirely
unknown to them, and without their knowledge. With
regard to the statements made by Smith, who bad, for
some reason, endeavoured to make the facts as disgusting as
he could—as to what he said and did—that if he had in the
first instance have made the complaints to the trustees,
such proceedings would have been immediately stopped,
and the commissioner or the public would never have had
this painful case before them. How a person who was
conscious of such things could have kept them back for so
long a period, and then come forward in the way he had
done, and state them, he did not know. He was willing
to believe that it was the remorse of conscience. It might
he, however, from some dislike to the person who was over
him. When he made the complaint with regard to the
temporary graves, it was immediately stopped. He would
again repeat that it had been the constant wish of the
proprietors and all connected with the burial ground, that
the greatest propriety and decorum should have been
observed at the interments; and he would tell the com-
missioner why they should wish that the burials should be
conducted with decency and decorum. Many of them had
families interred there, and it would have been a great
chock to their feelings if they had heard of such a
procedure going on. He therefore thought that be had
exonerated the trustees from any blame or any knowledge
in the matter. Having said that much, he would at once
go into the questions that were more immediately con-
cted with the enquiry, and he believed that it would be
seen that they divided themselves into two part—firstly,
with regard to what had been done as to the violation of
the order in cluncil, and the other was as to the conduct-
leg of the interments and the improperly disposing of the
private graves. I will referto the fact. In the opening state-
ment made bylllr.r&Gowan,he mentioned that on the 15th
June, 1856, the inspector was at the ground, and saw an in-
terment. He saw the planks put over fhe body, but the
grave was not filled up. He gave notice of the fact to
Mr. Kirkus, and on the very next day that gentleman
called at the office of the Health Committee, and stated
that the reason that grave was not filled up was because
the funeral had taken place on the Sunday. But
there was an imputation east upon that statement, and
it was insinuated that such was not the fact, but
that the body had been kept there until it was removed to
a common grave. He would state, and the Secretary might
be asked the question, 1' Whether it was not the practice

when a funeral took place on the Sunday, either in a private
or in a common grave, not to fill the grave up until the
next morning ?" The near day that grave was filled up,
therefore Mr. Kirkus was right in the statement he had
made. The men are allowed the privilege, being in their
best clothes, not t ) fill such grave up until the nett day,
but merely to put the planks over the body. Then the first
evidence that was Tilled was that of Mr. Tyrer.
That, he thought, he could dismiss with a single
remark. Ho did rot think the Health Committee
had ever had a single complaint of any smell—nor
had the inhabitants complained of any. The late Venerable
Archdeacon Brooks had said it was not a pratty sight, but
he stated th he never found any unpleasant smell from
it. He thought Mr. Tyrers evidence would not he considered
very ,conclusive, as he only rode past once or twice a
day, when no complaints had been made ; and he (Mr.
Lace) had ben there that Morning, and, on asking a
servant the question, was told that she had never smelt
anything. The next point was, that four or five bodies
had been put into one family grave ; that there had been
an improper traffic carried on with the graves without
proper autlacrity. This was the case of Mr. L—. This
had been explained by stating that it had been done by a
forged instrument, and so the proper persons had been
deprived of the grave. That was the fact ; but he could
lot help expressing his sorrow that any relative of L
deceased p. rson should have n)rarnitted such a crime as to
forge a document to dispose of a grave. [Here the forged
instru:nent was handed to the commissioner, who said that
he had received a letter from Mr. L—, and the writing
was quite different.] Mr. Lace then detailed the
facts connected with this case, from which it
appeared that Mr. L was the owner of a grave;
the first interment in it was that of his wife; some years
altar his mother in law diedj and she was buried in the
grave ; and after that an application was made to bary a
nephew, when it was found that the grave had been sold ;
but upon its being found that the document had been
forged, another grave was provided. It was proved that
there was no blame on the part of the secretary, as he did
not know of the forgery, and he (Mr. Lace) regretted that
they had not sufficient evidence to bring the case home to
the party who had con:linked such a crime.

The Inspector said, to ease the mind of Mr. L—, from
whom he had received a letter, he could say that the docu-
ment transferring the grave was not in his handwriting.
Mr. Lace : With regard to the case of Mr M—, the
only remark he had to make in that case was, that the
undertaker required that the deceased should be immediately
ntered, and although be wished to have a private grave,
he could not wait three days until one was excavated.
These were the three or four cises with regard to the
private graves ; and that brought him to the next point,
which was more immediately under the consideration of
the commission, the resolution of the Order in Council,
and he would not attempt to say that there had
not been more than one interment in one common grave.
In the first instance, it had been attempted to place only one
body in one grave, but it was soon found that the lab Airing
classes could not afford to pay £6 for each grave ; and from
the pressing wants of the labouring classes, the system of
which they had heard, and which he could not attempt to
defend, had been adopted. He would not say any more on
that point ; but he did not know what would be done,
unless more land was found for interment; but, on the part
of the trustees, he was instructed to assure the commissioner
that all interments of more than one body in one grave has
terminated, and shall not be renewed. He would also say
that no ground that has already been used for interments,
unless it has beea for a private grave, shall bo again used ;
so that, in future, the cemetery will only be kept open for
private graves. He would add, that since this enquiry
had been going on, applications had been made from at
least 20 persons to have their relatives interred there, and
it has been stated that they did not car) at what incon-
venience; but all such applications had been refused to be
complied with.
After a brief conversation, Mr. M'Gowan, on the
part of the Health Committee, said : As this en•
quiry had extended over the best part of three days, and
during that interval much new matter—matter of which be
had not bad any previous knowledge—had been intro-
duced, it might be necessary that he should, in order that
it might be fresh in the recollection of the commissioner,
again submit to him the grounds upon which the Health
Committee had been induced to take upon themselves the
responsibility of bringing the case before the government.
He would therefore give a statement of the complaints, and
select some case under each head. The grounds of this
complaint, as stated in the letter to the government, were,
that the order in council had been violated, that many
interments had been made in one grave, that there had been
a desecration of the dead by the removing of the remains
from one place to another without authority. These were
the complaints that bad been made, and he submitted that
all the statements he had made in the first instance had
been clearly and fully substantiated. In fact, the gravest
charge had been admitted, namely, that the system of putting
bodies into preparatory graves had existed for two 3 ears and
a half. That friends, parents, and orphans had visited the
graves, and wept over the remains of the departed,
when, in fact, they were elsewhere. The explanation that
had been given to that part was no excuse, but it might
have been in justification for withholding the order in
council. Besides, the promise given by Mr. Kirkus had
been violated, therefore he contended, that there was
nothing to bind the authorities that they would not again
break the law, the order in council, and their promises ;
and, instead of receiving only 20s for each grave, it appeared
that ti-ey had put as many as thirty or ferty bodies into
one, so that, in fact, they had received from £3O to £4O,
instead of 20s, for a single grave. The next, what justifi-
cation had been given for the traffieVg in the private
graves. It had been stated that it had been done without
the consent or knowledge of the authorities. That ap •
peered very strange; but even if it was so, they had no
right to dispose of the coffi 1, the shroud, the nails, the
plate, the body, and even the bones of the departed, for,
according to their own documents, they could
only dispose of the " land and the stone."
Having commented at some length on this part
of the case, he said he could not believe that
the servants of the trustees could have acted as they had
done, without they had received the authority from their -
superiors He then at considerable length commented on
the conduct of Mr. Kirkus in hiding from him the fact that
the system did exist—of promising him, on his word and
honour, that it should be discontinued, and then breleking
his word, contending that after what had occurred, that no
faith could be placed upon their words, and that, therefore,
the only course that could be adopted, and would satisfy
the grave owners or the public, would be to have the burial
ground entirely shut up; and that, upon the part of the
Health Committee, was the application he then made. Mr.
M'Gowan with considerable energy and ability pressed the
above points upon the attention of the Commissioner, and
resumed his seat.
The Commissioner said the ultimate decision did not
rest with him ; his duty was confined to hearing the
case, and making a report, but before doing so, of course
he should give the matter his most serious consideration,
but he thought he might say that he could not agree with
Mr. M'Gowan, because he thought that there was a great
difference between a promise given in that room from the
responsible parties, than from an implied promise given
elsewhere, but of course his attention should be applied to the
points urged, and until he had well considered the subject,
he should not make his report upon the matter. He then
thanked all the gentlemen who had been engaged in the
enquiry for the courtesy, they had shown him, and said
the enquiry was brought to a conclusion.
Before the Commissioner left his seat, a gentleman,
whose name we understand was Patterson, requested to
put a question. He wished to know, whether the burial
ground could not be transferred to the Corporation,
or some other public body, fur he said, after what had taken
place, the public could never have any faith in the present
trustees.

The Commissioner said that was a point of law.

Mr. Patterson said it could be closed for the present,
and then it could be transferred to some other
public body. He was sure that no report that
did not recommend the adoption of such a course, would
give satisfaction to the public He spoke as a burgess
of the borough, and public opinion, which was aroused on
the subject, would insist upon it, Lied to accomplish which
a petition would be signed by 10,000 of the inhabitants.
Mr. Corkhill considered the practices adopted by the
burial ground authorities, was much worse than the system
pursued in India, where the natives burned their widows.
Missionaries were sent out to civilise those poor people, but
he felt sure missionaries were more required to put a stop
to the abominable and disgraceful practices that had
been pursued at the Necropolis.
Several parties here applied to have authority to have
their graves opened to see if their children and relatives
had been removed to which Mr. Lacy assented.
The Commissioner said be could Rot recommend that
such a system [should be carried out to any great extent,
as it might do more injury.
Here several parties called upon the Commis-
sion to report in favour of the grounds being
closed entirely, observing than they did not mind
foregoing their rights to the graves, rather than have the
remains of their relatives subjected to such desecration.
Mr. M Gowargobserved that the4Commissioner would see
that be was right, from that display of public feeling, that
nothing less than closing the Neerepelis burial ground
would give satisfaction.
There were a large number of persons present to give
further evidence, each of whom expressed the greatest
amount of indignation at the disclosures that had been
given, and earnestly appealed to have the place entirely
closed.

After some little excitement being manifested, the
proceedings were brought to a termination.

the municipal act, from voting either at parliamentary
or municipal elections, and, therefore, I think this
question having been introduced, which I think rather
impolitic, that the men should clearly understand that
dock gatemen are not, under the act, prevented from
voting.
Mr. Barber : i regret that thie eviestion should
assume the appearance of a political matter. lam sorry
to say that it has been re opened by what has fallen from
Mr. Bold, which will certainly have the effect of en
couragino• the officers cf this establishment to pursue a
course which, in the sentiment of this committee, is
rather inadvisable. Allusion has been here made publicly
to this question which must necessarily look like political
feeling. It is therefore, very injurions that this thing
should hive been opened up again. I am, at the same
time, sorry that Mr. Rathbone has withdrawn his resolu-
tion. I myself hare a very strong feeling that we should
be as clear as passible from any imputation of making
this estate a political machine. We know well how we
stand out of doors, and it behoves us not to increase that
feeling of which we a-e suspected, and not without some
foundation, of using this valuable estate for the intorests
of our town especially. If those elsewhere have such an
impression, will they not readily also have the irripreasioe
that we use the estate for other purposes that are not
right and proper, The estate does not belong to the
town of Liverpool, but is the public property of the
country, and in the critical position in which we stand
b =fore parliament and the country, it would be advis file
for us to show that we are free from all suspicion that attaches
to us in this respect. Ido hope that something will be
done, now that the discussien has gone so far, to flee us
from those imputations. It is very requisite that we
should do so; we have something to redeem in the eyes
of the world. I speak not as a partisan, for I belong to
no party, but I speak for the general interest of the estate.
The Chairman: I most say for myself, as well as for
those members of the committee with whose opinions I
am most conversant, that I am not aware of 'any such
motive having influenced any member of the committee
in the manner alluded to by Mr. Barber. As to the
imputations which may be cast on us, I myself am quite
eareless as to them. I believe that this estate has been
always looked upon and managed by this committee
with a single view to the benefit of the property, and the
trade frequenting the port ' • and I expressed, when this
matter was first introduced by Mr. Rathbone, my great
regret that such a snbj 'et should have been brought
before the committee. As to the motion itself, it conveys
nothing but what I have always understood is the rule
that guides this committee in all cases. I think this
committee would visit with its displeasure any improper
iniftunce by any officer of this trust over any subordinate
in the employ of the committee; and it follows, as a
matter of course, that if any man does any-
thing improper in the opinion of the committee,
he will be visited with the displeasure of the committee.
a hat is the rule which has been always understood
and acted on by me, and by, I believe, every gentleman
connected with the committee. As to what one party or
the other may throw out in the imputation of motives,
we all know that one party is very print: to throes
unworthy motives upon another. All that sort of thing,
especially at times like this, I throw to the winds, and
certainly would never make it any ground of action. It
is extremely unfortunate that this matter has been pressed,
and the sooner it is dropped the better.
Mr. Roberts Gladstone : There is one circumstance
which appears to me a complete justification of the
motion, and that is, that the legitimate freedom, which, I
contend, belongs to all servants of this trust, has been, on
previous occasions, beyond all question, abused. That
circumstance, I think, justifies us in endeavouring to
arrive at some complete understanding as to what the
duties of officers employed by the Dock Committee really
are, under circumstances similar to those which now
exist. For myself, I should be the very last to attempt
to interfere in any way with the perfect freedom of the
voter, but we must remember that the fends out of which
the salaries of these officers are paid are derived from a
great variety of parries who think differently on political
matters. We, as a committee, are by no means unanis
mous on this subject of politics, and therefore I think that
our servants, while enjoying the most complete freedom
in the exercise of the franchise, voting for the man they
think the fitteet to represent them, I say they omelet to
abstain from all overt acts which involve the question of
propriety. If that understanding is not come to, what
is there to prevent every member of this committee
occupying himself for the next ten days in going about
the docks, and canvassing all the parties who are
employed by this trust? Ad would it not then become
a perfect scramble between one and the other ) It is
from this very circumstance that those employed by us
have transgressed the bounds of propriety. It is from
that very circumstance that we are now brought to
discuss this particelar subject, and very much I lament
that there should have been occasion for it, but still I
cannot agree in the propriety of servants of this trust
occupying themselves in an active personal canvass, and
I have stated my reasons for my objection. " What is
sauce fur the goose is sauce for the gander," and if there
is such an understanding, it will be equally good for both
parties. It is not because there is in this trust one
particular party, having a large preponderance over the
other, that the minority should not require from the
majority what is right, proper, and just towards all
men.

The Chairman : I think Mr. Gladstone's observations
are quite correct, to this extent, that a servant of the
committee has no more business to canvass during the
hours of duty than a member of the committee has
to ask a servant of the trust for his vote. (Hear,
hrar ) 1 quite agree with Mr. Gladstone, that
for any member of the committee to ask an officer,
or any man is tile employment of the trust, for his vote,
would be extremely improper. (flear, hear.) Mr. Rath_
bone courteously exoner eted me from any such im-
pulation, in bringing forward his motion. But, if
Mr. Gladstone means to say that the officers of this
trust are not allowed to exercise the same privilege
which we ourselves exercise, then I totally disagree
with him. We, ourselves, take the liberty of canvassing
any person we like, who does not belong to this trust, in
any way we think proper ; and, surely, any officer
belonging to this trust, who has a political bias one way
or the other, when he goes to his home in the evening,
is at perfect liberty to canvass his fellow townsmen, not
being servants of this trust, if he pleases. (Hear, hear.)
Is a servant of this trust not to be allowed, when he
goes home in the evening, to carnazs his neighbours, not
servants of the trust ? That is the liberty Mr. Gladstone
and other gentlemen take for themselves, and I consider
that the officers of the trust have the same privileges and
the same right to exercise the franchise, and that what
would be improper in an officer of the trust would be
improper in a member of the committee ; nothing more
or less. Clear, hear ) We are appointed to take care
that the trust is managed in the best way for the public
at large. It is our duty not to prostitute that office far
any political purpose whatever. That is what I have
always conceived, and I have always acted in that spirit ;
but I conceive that we and the officers of the trust, when
not engaged in its employment, are at liberty to canvass
any man not belonging to it. I should be ashamed to
ask any man belonging to this trust for his vote, or to
influence him in any shape or way. I have always declined
to do so unon any occasion, and I should recommend every
officer and servant of the trust not to canvass any man
belonging to the trust with reference to his vote. But if
you say that an officer of the trust is not to canvass any of
his fellow citizens not belonging to the trust, then I say
you would be interfering in a manner which is tyrannical
and extremely improper. (Rear, hear.) I think the
officers have as just a right to exercise the same privilege
which we ourselves have.

Mr. Anderson said he was very glad Mr. Rathbone
had withdrawn the motion in the way he did. (Hear,
hear.) He wished to say that, although opposed to Mr.
Rathbone in political opinions, yet be thought that gentle.
man had not got credit for the manner in which he had
introduced the subject there. He did not believe Mr.
Rathbone was actuated by any political motive in bringing
it forward, and ho did not believe he meant to cast the
slightest reflection upon the chairman. If the suggest;cn
he (Mr. Anderson) threw out at the meeting before last had
been adopted, the disagreeable discussion of the last meet-
ing would have been avoided.
Mr. Robinson :Mr. Chairman, I think the doctrine you
have partly alluded to, would be dangerous in its conse-
quences out of doors. I think the heads of departments
officially holding an important position, and having the
control of labourers under their management, would act
with much more discretion if they ahsfained entirely from
any active interference in the coming contest. (Hear,
hear.) I think every man has a right to vote as he thinks
fit. But we all know that the heads of departments have
certain influence, and if they take a part by active inter-
ference, it trust certainly interfere with that freedom which
every one desires to s cure. (Hear, hear.)
The Chairman : I crate agree with you that they ought
not to interfere with any one employed by us. But does
Mr. Robinson mean to Foy that a servant in our employ-
ment, when he goes home in the afternoon, is not to be
allowed to speak to his neighbour on politics ?
Mr. R )binson: I am alluding to persins employed by
the officials of this trust.
The Chairman : Then you quite misunderstood my
observations. I commenced them by saying that it would
be extremely improper for any officer in our employ to
endeavour to influence the vote of any man in our employ.
Mr. Robinson : Well, I am glad to have elicited that
from you.

The Chairman : You did not elicit it. I had stated it
before-

Mr. Robinson : There is a dangerous influence.
The Chairman I objected to anything going out of this