The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-12-08
The Health Committee of the
Board Of Supervisors Take
Action.
AN ADVERSE MINORITY REPORT.
A Strong Fight Over the Question Is
Expected at the Next Meeting
of the Board.

The residents of Richmond district have
so far succeeded in their efforts to stop the
burial of dead bodies within the City linn
its that the Board of Supervisors will take
up the question, even if the Board of
Health is silent on the subject. The Com
mittee on Health and Police at the next
meeting of the board will recommend that
it be unlawful to bury the dead in any
cemetery or elsewhere within the City
except in lots already purchased for that
purpose. This would prevent the sale OF
burial lots, bat will not prevent the use
for interment of lots owned by private par
ties in the cemeteries.
The burial question has been before the
committee for several weeks, being pushed
by the Richmond District Property-own-
ers' Association. They held that the GEN.
eteries were menace not only to the
whole City, but especially to them, from
the elevation of he burial lots on the hills
near to and above their locality. Rain
water was shed down during the wet
season from the sandy soil OF the graves,
and even the air was heavy with the gases
OF decaying matter. There was some OPP
position. to the proposed removal OF the
visors Benjamin, bunker and Morg en-
stern voted in favor of the resolution to
recommend no more lot sales.
A minority report was submitted by
Dimold and King, favoring the prohibit
ton of the establishment OF any more
cemeteries within the City limits. but per-
hitting the use of all the land now in
closed as cemeteries. They contend that
the majority resolution to be proposed to
the board would practically coefiscate the
unsold land of the cemetery companies.
The question will be warm ly debated by
both parties before the next meeting OF
the board.
1--WE do not wish to cause needless ex-
pense to those who have bought burial
lots in the cemeteries" said Secretary
Hubs of the association, "but we must
put some check on City interments. Three
or four crowded graveyards in this big grow
ing place are too much. In all the large
cities of the United States where the liv-
ing have encroached upon the dead the
graveyards had to go. OF course the re-
moval was opposed by those who owned
lots there, but their seltishness didn't
check the march of progress nor the action
of intelligent health boards, which decided
that sanitary measures were OF more I'M
portance than sentiment.
"Our living City's health demands that
moved, ana sooner or later it will be done.
What handsome building spots those
slopes would make if all the bodies were
removed. Some of these cemeteries are
old and in poor repair, especially the an
cient walled graveyard on Geary street on
the line of the cars running to the park
and Cliff House. What cheerful sight
those old, wooden, broken-down palings
are to the visitor and tourist from the
East.
II understand certain Supervisors are
in favor of prohibiting the establishment
of any more cemeteries in the City, but
letting the ones now here go ahead and
fill up. That is the joker indeed. OF
course, those Supervisors well know that
no more cemeteries will be established in
the City anyhow, as there is no land for
that purpose. There is no need of wasting
time passing ordinances to regulate a
matter that will regulate itself. They
speak of conhscation. Well, better a few
lots lie idle than an epidemic visit the
City I would prefer to see all those
bodies taken up and buried elsewhere, that
the lots could be improved and put to
other uses, but We'll take what we can get
now, and get the rest when we can"