The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1874-11-05
The Righ. of Burial.

We have before US Toledo paper con
tanning the full text Of the decision
Of the Court Of Common Pleas al
that place (alreadY reported by tele-
graph denying the Injunction asked iol
by John WYNN against the Priest in
charge Of St. Francis dc Sales Cemetery,
by whom he had been prevented from
buryipg his wife in lot owned by him in
SAID cemetery. The case, as we find y
more fully reported, is this:
A little more than week ago Mrs,
WYNN died in Toledo. She and her
whole family wero brought up in the
Catholic religion, but some years ago she
had obtained divorce from her hus-
band and married second time. When
she died recently the priest refused 10
administer the sacrament upon the
ground that her divorce and Sec
ond marriage had dissolved her
connection with the church. An at
tempt was then made to bury her in the
family lot in the Catholic cemetery, but
Father o'RTLRY interlered. The family
Of the deceased then applied to the Court
OF Common Pleas for an Injunction to re.
strain the priest from interfering, and a
trial Of the case resulted in the refusal OF
the court to interfere. The Jurisdiction oil
the cemetery Is thus given entirely into
the hands Of the church, and unless the de-.
cision Is reversed the relatives Of the de.
ceased have no power to inter her in the
lot beside the remains Of her family.
In reading over the decision ol the court
we do not SEQ that It settles any definite
principle in the case. The gist Of the decls.
ion is contained in the following extract
lromit: -"
"The petition simply alleges that Father
BOtt was the proper person to make this
sale. Father Bof did 80 In his official
capacity, and 1t seems to be the theory and
understanding OF the plaintiff and his
grantors that Father Botf made this sale,
received their money, and 30 far as the
making Of this conveyance, did so by
virtue OF his office as Pastor OF this Church,
and the natural conclusion, and l think,
necessary conclusion OF this 10, that the
parties understood that this was property
held by the Church, and for the Church,
and held subject to the rules and regula-
tious OF the Church. This is not denied,
and also It Ia further not denied that 1t
was property held subject 10 the rules and
regulations set up in the answer, and II
that is so, and these rules and regulations
are fully stated in the answer, and there Il
no objection made TO the UGlIdity Of the rules
and regulations 80 set up, see no reason
why the plaintiff should maintain his
suit"
1t will be observed in the above that
the Court remarked upon the fact that
the plaintiff had not sought to invalidate
the "rules and regulations" Of the church
that prevented him from burylng his wife
in his cemetery lot, but simply sought tc
restrain the Priest from carrying them
into effect. What the Court would have
felt bound to do had the plaintiff objected
to the validity of the "rules and regula'
tIons" of the church, it does not say. II
might or might not have granted the in
junction. Therefore it does not seem that
any principle Of law applicable to the
case has been settled by the mere refusal
to grant the Injunction TO the plaintiff,
The counsel for the latter say that the
case will be carried up and tested. The
Cleveland Leader thinks it ought to be
1t thinks it Is time 10 know whether the
use and enjoyment Of property can bG
abridged by any regulation that practi
cally confscates 1t because Of the owners
religion. 1t concludes an article upor
the subject as follows:
We know not upon what principle o.
law the Toledo Judge has founded his de-
cision, but 1t certainly is in distressing
contrast with every instinct Of justice. The
! certificate oi purchase showed that Mrs
Babbington, the mother OF Mira. Wynn
had bought the cemetery lot, paid for i
in full, and was consequently its owner
There was no stipulation in the purchase
that the lot should be used Tor the buria
OF persons protesting any particular faith
The lot was her property. II she SO de-
sired 1t might become the last resting
place OF Protestant, an lsraelite, o Spir
itualist or a Mormon. The laws ot Ohio
demand that all cemetery lots be usec
solely for burial purposes, but they
do not pretend 10 make any spec
ifcaiions concerning the religion pro
fessed previous 10 death. The law
mades no distinction among the deao. II
New York, about q year ago, objections
we're made 10 the burial in cemetery o
7 man who had been hung, but the objec
tions were OF no avail In court, ss the Law
knew no difference in dead bodies. Th'
! decision Of this case deprives the family o
Mrs. Wynn Of any use Of their property II
Q the lot unless they continue 10 observe al
!. the exsctions OF the church. ltplaces tn
D prejudices Of the church above the laws o
the State; ignores tho guaranteed rights o
q property owner, and conflicts in everl
respect with the spirit Of our institutions
/ The plaintiff has announced that an sp
a peal will be taken to a higher court, ant
il Is 10 be hoped that decision will Their
be rendered more In accordance with tn
t principles Of justice.
IL
mun nnnsAnR,s RRsIrITI