New-York tribune., 1901-02-10
STATUS OF THE CORPSE.
THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL OVER
HIS OWN BODY. DEAD OR ALIVE

funeral pOmp that has ever been recorded a
brief dispatch in some of the daily papers told
of an intrusion upon the last rest of an obscure
negro in Virginia which seems difficult to ex-
plain consistently with law, at least as law is
understood in this state. The negro. who is said
to have been wealther than most of his race.
had been buried face downward. with his head
uointfne TO the east: his body was eXhumed and
reinforced in the more usual position. face up
ward with the feet to the east The presump-
ton. al least, is that the extraordinary manner
Of his burial was his own choice. other circum-
stances particularly his disinheritins his daugh-
ter because she married man Of her own color.
point to I. decided cccentricity of character.
Still. if one remembers the origin Of the general
custom. it is not difficult to find way Of ac-
counting for this mans exceptional preference
in the matter Of burial. The Christian laity
have from time immemorial been buried recum-
bent feet eastward. in the hope Of glorious
resurrection" and in order To rise facing the
Judge Of the quick and the dead when He shall
descend into the Valley Of Jehoshaphat; the
clergy have been buried in such position as to
rise facing the laity. This old negro. if he were
as pious as he was eccentric. may have desired
the Resurrection morn to find him prone, like a
suppliant before the Judgment Seat
BY . further coincidence. another dispatch.
published only one day earlier. told of decision
case Of trespass according to which corpse.
buried. becomes part cf the ground to
which it has been committed'-at least, as long
as that ground continues to be burial ground.
Thes. two cases. occurring in two typically
contrasting States. suggested inquiry Of New
York lawyer who happens To have earned some
eminence 10y monograph written and an action
Won twelve years ago on the rights of sur
vivors over the bodies Of deceased relatives.
According TO the law Of this STATE. il appears
that FIRST. a human corpse cannot be property
in the strict legal sense. and. second. that tho
right of an individual over his body does not
cease with death ana is not limited 10 any part
or parts = the body. The former Of these two
propositions is common law; the latter is also
statutory provision and by it a person Whose
arm, for instance. has been amputateG in s.
pital. n whose finger has been accidentally cut
off, still retains his legal right 70 the disposal of
that arm or finger. \ manicure cor a barber
in this state has no right to retain or dispose
Of the personal clippings Of a patron with ,ur
that patrons consent The Rape If tho Lock."
celebrated 10y Pope would be distinctly Illegal
In Ner-York After death the body of an in
dividual must be disposed Of IN accordance with
his or her wishes 50 Tar as The, age known. AMI
feasib.. consistently with public health and pol
icy. II IS one II the duties II The executor TO
enforc- the viii of testator in this as in other
regards. and some years ago a woman lawyer
Of Chicago mischel u-ly placed several trust
companies in an embarrassing position by writ
ing To- ask them how they would act in case "a
testator had will.d 70 have his body inciucrat-d
and the surviving relatives objected TO this
method - bestoWins the remains. one reply
which WAS published and republ.sA,l in the law
Journals clearly represented the c1mpany "a
Willing IL disregard the wishes OF the dead for
the sake Of conciliatins the living.
n large number of decisions collected 10y tho
expert already referred To- Indicate that in
most Of the other States. As in York. tn
right Of dispOsing Of 4 corpse belongs subject
10 the wishes Of the deceased. first 20 a suryiy-
ing husband wife and then To the next Of
kin Ii has been decided 10y the Supreme Court
OF this state that There exists a personal right
in husband wife next Of kin to have the
the purposes Of burial" This right broadly
Speaking. is founded upon the duty OF burial
according to the Judicial maxim that every duty
cOnfers right Litigation on these rights is
rare. ana the case mentioned at the beginning
Of this article having given occasion for a
monograph on the subject attracted wide atten-
uon throughout the United States for its sinl;u-
larity. The issue was between the husband
OF the deceased and her relatives. Who had taken
possession Of her body and buried it regardless