The morning call., 1894-09-09

A CoRPsE-J. F. NJ, City. This correspon-
dent presents novel question. 1t is: I'm case
husband and wife separate without divorce, the
husband is taken sick and expresses desire
that his wife shall not attend him during his
sickness, but that other parties whom he names
shall. Fearful of death he makes will in
which be declares That the parties who have
taken care of him shall have full power to dis
pose of his body. Could the wife lawfully OBJ
tain possession of her late husbands body ana
hold it against the protest of tbe parties named
In The Will ?" The writers Of law dictionaries
declare that corpse is considered nullis bonis,
or the property OF no one, ii follows that at
common law stealing a corpse is not larceny.
A New York court has decided that dead
body belongs to no one. In the American and
English Encyclopedia of Law It is declared
that neither the husband nor The next OF kin
have, strictly speaking. any right OF property
in dead body. In the California Codes there
is section that refers 10 The burial OF dead
bodies. This declares that If the deceased was
married woman the duty of bury
ing her remains devOlves upon the husband,
but II the deceased was not married woman,
but left any kindred the duty Of burial devOlYes
upon The person or persons IN the same degree
nearest OF Kin 10 The deceased. being OF adult
age, and Within this State and possessed OF
sufficient means 10 defray the necessary eX-
penses. Further, the code says that the person
charged by law with the duty of burylng the
bOuy of deceased person Is entitled TO the
II, except In the case of an inquest, then the
Coroner has charge of IL until the inquest is
over. In Indiana IL has been decided that the
bodies OF the dead belong 10 tie surviving rela-
tiyes in the order OF inheritance of property.
gentleman veTsed in the law, on being shown
the question, gave II as his opinion that
corpse, not being property. is not the subject
OF disposition by will, consequently the parties
named In the will would not have any legal
right to it.
Judge Cofey of the Superior Court, when
asked about The matter, said: "ln the case of
Patterson VS.. Patterson, reported IN the fifty
ninth New York report, the opinion being rem
dered by the Chief Judge OF Appeals, Charles
James FOlger, II was held that the husband
surviving II bound TO bury the corpse OF his
wife-a converse, the wife is bound TO bury the
body Of the deceased husband. The ground
OF this IS the general right OF every
one TO have decent burial after death,
which Implies the right 10 have his
place where it lies TO a cemetery or other
proper Enclosure, and there put under ground
A widow, who was an infant In law Chat IS,
under the age OF majority, and not ordinarily
capable OF cOntraciIng), was held liable on her
contract for the funeral expenses of her de-
ceased husband. because decent Christian
right existing, the law casts upon some one the
duty of seeing that it Is accorded.
At comm on law, If poor Detson OF no estate
died, IL W as the duty OF him under whose roof
the body lay, 10 carry It decentiy covered TO a
place OF sepulture. AS to the manner of burial,
If testatOr leave directions as TO specific form
dependent upon the practica blity of the d-
rectOns or the wish OF the surviving husband
or wife. Ordinarily this IS construed 10 be pre-.
catOTy, a mere wish. not controlling the will of
the survivor, ana is often dlsregarded. as in
the case Of DIR. Isaac ROwell, ana the well.
known lawyer, George BarstOw, and in many
other cases that might be cited. Mere separa-
tion does not affect the right OF surviving
spouse, but divorce does, as in the case of Mary
Jane Turner, deceased. decided by the proba e
department In this city on February II, 1884. He
claimed reimbursement for expenses paid, as a
stranger, aud while so regarded by the law, yet
having voluntarily paid out this money being
under no obligation 10 do SO, he had no recourse
against the assets OF her separate estate"
An heir has property in the monuments and
escuIcheOns of his ancestors, yet he has none
In their bodies nor ashes. II any one in taking
up dead body, steal the shTOud or other ap-
parel II will be felony, for the property thereof
q. G.. OF The shroud or appareD remains IN the
executor or whoever was at the charge of the
funeral, while taking the body Itself is only a
mlsdemeanor. for there can be no property
therein IN any one.