Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-12-09
A Eounsain On.resA
Crematories vs.. Cemeteries.

To the Editor Of The Evening Star:
1t is strange that, at this age of the world
and In so enlightened and progressive land
as America, the old. narrow ideas as to the
disposition of our dead still obtain.
A few daring ones-a few pioneers-have
given the weight of their words in favor of
the discontinuance of earth burial and have
arranged that after death the weight of eX
ample also should be added to their words.
by leaving directions that their bodies be
incinerated. That. in these days Of progress,
the old method of laying away bodies in the
earth to molder and often to contaminate
should continue is astonishing More than
this, with the evils it brings in its train. II
Is appalling!
The subject Of cremation has been dis
cussed more or less at times and more than
one excellent article written thereupon: but
the question does not seem to take the hold
upon the public mind that common-sense,
sanitation and economy would dictate. From
the earliest times fire has been used as a
means of publication. Now at a time when
that dread scourge, the cholera, is the bette
noire which haunts the thoughts Of the COM
munity,we still turn persistently from avail
ing ourselves of the strongest weapon
against the Judgment Of the Invader The
sentimental feeling for it is sentimentality
beloved body-the husk only of the immortal
spirit-in the ground is one of the most diff.
cult things to contend with, and 1t is a feel.
ing that goes little below the surface of
sentimentality. If the secrets of the out
wardly lovely white cities" Of the dead
could be unveiled what horror would strike
US. Far better. even from a point of senti-
ment, to give those bodies at once to the
flame. which leaves after its fiery track only
few pure, white ashes, which might be
reverently collected and placed beyond
desecration. than to consign to mold cor
ruption and the worm the bodies so dear to
us in life,
But 1t is not of sentiment 1 would speak.
1t Is to sanitary and economic view of the
question would direct your attention Our
1rst duty Is to the living. That the living
should be exposed to disease and often to
oeath by the vicinage of cemeteries with all
their foul aggregation-that the beautiful
breast of mother earth should be converted
into charnel house-that the living should
be fairly crowded out by the dead-is mon.
strous.
IL Is q well-known scientific fact that the
germs OF disease linger for years in the
earth and that the, at times, necessary dig
glng up and turning over the earth of old
graVeyards causes the germs Of disease to
start 1orth upon renewed lease of devas-
tation and death.
When the method of incineratio as q
means of disposing Of the bodies of our dea
becomes the rule we shall have less disea Sc
fewer poisoned wells and a cessation of
visits to graveyards, where, often, the foun.
dation OF other graves is laid
When We have put aside the dictates of a
morbid sentimentality-when cremation Is
supported by legislation, as all reforms must
De TO De successful-we will be a healthier
and wiser people. And who will say that we
show less honor to the dead because We CON
slider the welfare of the living as nara
mountf MIRIAM LESTER.