The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-11-17
BODY-sNATCHTNG AS A SCIENCE.

on the charge Of numbering q man In order to
sell his body for dissection. together with the
robbery Of A. T. Stewards grave, and the nu-
merous other cases of body-snatching that
have lately occurred in the Northern States,
brings society face to face with one of the
most loathsome characters the world has
ever known. How this ghoul shall be dealt
with and the sanctity of the grave protected
from dissertation by the destruction of his
horrible traffic In the human dead, Is q ques-
ton that Is engaging the attention of
thoughtful men all over the country.
Since the detection Of the fearful crimes Of
Burke and Hare at Edinburgh. in !oe6, and
the conviction Of Sne former on the testimony
OF his accomplish, who had turned Kings evil
dence, no civilized community has been
shocked by such q series of revolving out
RACES as have occurred throughout the North
ern States during the past year. The first Of
these shocking occurrences that attracted
public attention was the robbery of the grave
of Mr. Harrison, the son of an eX-President
and an old and venerated citizen, in Ohio, and
the subsequent discovery of his body, hang
ing by the neck In the vault Of o. medical col
Iege This case led to q number of other dis
closures not less revolving, and In every In
stance the missing bodies were traced, direct
ly or Indirectly, to this same institution.
Public opinion was grossly outraged and at
one time mob violence was threatened. A
number Of prosecutions followed, OF
course, but we have not heard
as yet, that any convictions have been pro-
cured and, doubtless, because OF the defects
of the law. Since these occurrences, this pecu-
liar crime, II such it be, has assumed an cpl
demic form and, for months, scarcely day
has passed that our dispatches have not re-
counted the abominnble dongs OF the resur-
rectionist in some portion of the country. The
infamy Of these traf1ickers In the dead, how
ever, reached, In the murder of Suffering
Jack by Mrs. Alexander and her paramour,
Bassett, it's most fendish, and in the desecra-
ton of Stewards grave, it's most loathsome
depths.
In the case Of Mrs. Alexander and Bas-
sett, murder was committed, and the pro-
ceeding ut law was plain, but in case Of
mere Dody-snatchng" the robbery Of a
grave-the law is far from being sufficient,
Whether such an act Is criminal Or not de-
ponds entirely upon the statutory law of the
State wherein it Is committed. In New York
there Is q statute which makes the violation
of grave, either In wantonness or for the
purpose of selling the corpse, crimi-
nal offense. This statute imposes q
penalty on the purchaser as well as
on the resurrectionist. The Sun contends
that this statute does not apply to the Stew
art case, and that no prosecutions can be
made under 1t. The World, on the other
hand, says that the statute does apply. The
difference between these papers Is mere
bubble. The statute was made to prevent
the dissertation of graves. The trainers of 1t
contemplated, from past experience, but two
motives for such an act-pure wantonness
and body snatching, or the stealing of corpses
In order to sell them for anatomical purposes.
The statute, therefore, provides, specially,
for these two NOTICES, and, as the motive Is On
essential element of crime, the Sun argues
that the robbers of A.. T. Stewards grave can
not be convicted because neither wantonness
nor the price to be realized from the sale of
the corpse itself induced the act. This how
ever, is mere refinement of sophistry. The
statute was meant to protect the sepulture of
the dead and punish those who violated it..
The statement of the motives necessary to
constitute the crime is mere verbiage and SUI
perfiuity. The proof Of any purpose, not
legitimate, in violating O. grave makes 1t O
crime.
These are mere bubbles in New York, where
there is special statute; but in this State
where we have no statute whatever upon the
subject, q much more serious question of con-
structiOn arises.
hr1i1I 1nh thrf nft bn /1,t e
Stewards grave occur in Louisiana what legal
process do the laws supply either to punish
the ghouls or to recover the remains We
have no statute on the subject at all, and
whether such sacrilege is q crime or a civil
injury for which damages can be obtained or
the body itself recovered are purely questions
Of legal construction. To the non-legal, and,
perhaps, even to the professional mind it would
occur that the stealing of @ body is larceny
What is larceny? We have not Blackstone at
hand-we confess, with humiliation4-but, &C.
oordlng to our memory, it is the stealing and
carrying away, for the purpose Of applying
TO ones own use, the property of another.
Let us resolve this definition into its original
elements: 1, steaIing;2 carrying away; 8, for
the purpose of applying to ones own use
WiltLb tIC W W htOtt@. w Llo
any proprietary interest in body? Who
owns any corpse, and by what title has he
acquired his ownership-by gift, purchase,
Inheritance, or what other process Of convey
ing title?
Ownership must be established before the
crime Of larceny can be proved. The taking
Of that which belongs to nobody cannot be
larceny by any possible construction Of law.
Upon this point Blackstone says { Vol 4, chap
II, page 1861: Notwithstanding however,
that no larceny can be committed, unless
there be some property in the thing taken
and an owner; yet, if the owner be unknown
provided there be a property, it is larceny tc
steal 1t; and an indictment will lie, for the
goods Of person unknown. In like manner,
as among the Romans, the ler Hostilia dt
furtis provided that q prosecution for theft
might be carried on without the intervention
of the owner. This is the case Of stealing a
shroud out of grave, which is the property
| OF those whoever they were that buried the