The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1874-11-07
Our Hancock Correspondence
The Debate on the Cremation CUES.
ton.

The Debate on the Cremation CUES.
ton.
FAIRvBw, HANCOCK Co., Nov. 5.
Editors Of the Intell!geneef:
It has been "iully settled" The ques-
ton, We characterization, By the Fair
view Literary Association J! And didn't
tell you so? And didn't the IN earthly
combustors get busted up as they de-
servedi Read what Plsttenburg, Of the
Courier, who is Secretary Of the Society,
says:
The verdict Of the audience, 60 far as
we could learn, was in favor Of the old
style Of burial, that OF planting"
THUS, you see, We may all once more
address ourselves TO the business OF living,
with the comforting and elevating allici-
patton that like
Imperial Cesar, dead and TUNED to clay"
we ali, or any oil US, may one day come 10
stop hole to keep the VIVID away"
which is certainly great deal better and
more respectable and unitarian and so
forth, than 10 be incinerated down 10 a
mere saucer full Of worthless SCOT and
ashes.
But, about the debate. Well, in truth,
it was an interesting one, and was carried
~ with spirit and (present company ex-
cepted) ability. The affirmative was
III ilntsined by Messrs. Jason W. Hart
and John s. johnson (the latter Of whom
was sentimentsly OF that view; the neg
stive by Messrs. ]. r Donehoo and o. 5.
Marshall.
The affirmative promised their argu-
ment with observations and reasoning 10
show the indifference, in moral and re-
lIgious point OF view, Of the mode Of dis
posing Of the human dead. They then
follow with the claim that the adherence
10 the mode oil subterranean burial at the
present day is the result Of mere educa.
lion, or Of prejudice that has descended
10 Us from the barbsric days, when the
custom Of men were rude, and when
the sparseness Of population rendered
burial allowable. Cremation was argued
10 be "better mode OF disposal Of the
bodies OF the Dead" 1st, as a sanitary
measure, in avoiding the dlsagreesble and
often fatal effects Of graveyard putridity;
Sd, as q measure Of economy, In
doing away with the costly ex-
travSgance which modern custom
has made almost a necessity attendant
upon burials; Sd, as measure of me-
mortal preservation, whereby an endur.
ing remnant and relic Of the one loved or
honored body itself Of the dead may be
preserved In form not abhorent 10 the
senses. or course this Is but the briefest
outline Of what was claimed for crema-
ton.
For the negative It was maintained
that burial in the earth Is the natural, II
not the really God.ordained, way Of put
ting our dead out Of our sight; that ii has
been sanctioned by the practice of the
most pious and enlightened nations Of
the earth In all tme-especiall BY Gods
chosen people who have buried their
dead from the time that Abraham bought
the field nom Ephram the son of Zo6ar
the Hlttite, where were laid the remsins
Of his fair vile Sarah. The Greeks and
Romans, referred 10 by the affirmative AZ
enlightened nations practicing cremation
also, il was replied, pracliced many
bloody and indecent ceremonies, and
were therefore not examples for Us in
matters touching our religious or finer
feelings Concerning the sanitary ad.
Vantages claimed for cremation, they
were denied, as science had failed 10 dis
cover any evil effects from burial but in
exceptional cases. The condition Of tie
atmosphere Of the day itself (which hap.
pened to be very smoky one) when but
an inconsiderable portion Of The earth's
dead vegetation was undergoing The up-
natural process OF cremation, instead Of
the slower but more natural and heAIthv
one OF decomposition, was referred 10 AZ
proof Of the unwholsome and disaereable
results Of burning. As to economy, reason
taught that cremation might be, and hiE.
tory that II had been, attended with even
greater expense than burial. The Romans
had to pass laws restricting the enormous
expenses Of body.burnipg, And as 10