Year: 1878

1t was very sensible clergyman at Pitts
burgh who recently read paper upon the ex-
pensiveness of funerals and they were very
sensible colleagues who adopted his views as
their opinion. Mere fashion is nowhere more
hateful than in the burying Of the dead, and
none the less hateful because it imposes enor-
nous expenses upon those who cannot afford
them. The savings of year are often squan-
dered in the idle ostentation of n funeral. II
is a not unnatural feeling among the poor that
the last service they can render to a beloved
friend shall not fail in any usual distinction,
and the result is that living family is often
straitened that n dead member of it may lie
in mahogany coffin and be followed by a
long train of carriages toslls grave. Reform
must come from those who "set the fashion" ="
and modest simplicity in funerals can be at
tained only by the example of those who can
afford to be eXtravagant


The worthy undertaken, who lives by the
death of his fellow creatures, is naturally de-
sirous that grief shall be lavishly manifested,
and he encourages to the utmost this sombre
splendor The young American used to be
shocked as he read in English stories of mutes
and mourning carriages, of men hired to wear
the garb of sorrow, and of grief measured by
a train of emptiness. Two or three years ago
the movement against this extravaganza be-
gan in England and it has the public sympa-
thy and support of very eminent persons. 1t
has shown itself in this country by the COM
mon request, with the announcement of a
death, that no flowers be sent A simple and
beautiful tribute of affection has grown into
an oppressive fashion, and certain flowers
have become odious to many persons from
their constant association with funerals. When
such gifts are in truth the offerings of love
and sympathy, no symbols can be more
touching, but the moment they spring from
the mere force of fashionable custom, and
are sent to the house of mourning as gifts are
sent by formal acquaintance TO bride, with
no more feeling than in the leaving of cere-
monious visiting-cards. they are touching and
significant no longer. The change in the
mere fashion of flowers upon such occasions
can be carried by the same good sense into
every other funeral extravaganza, so that the
poor need no longer feel that their dead are
slighted if they are not buried with ruinous
expense.


There was another suggestion made at
Pittsburgh which was worthy of considera-
ton. 1t was proposed that funeral sermons
as matters Of course should not be preached /;
and to this suggestion there will be probably
a very general amen. They are of necessity
eulogies, for no good-hearted preacher would
choose such a time to tell unpleasant truths.
Yet if a man has been selfish, hard, grasping,
self-indulgent sordid-and there nre such
men what is the poor preacher to do: The
well-meaning reply that every person has
something good in him, and the eulogist can
speak of that, is conclusive if the preacher is
not 10 give his honest view of the character
of the dead. But to say of n man notorious
for meanness that he went regularly to church,
or of debauchee that he gave generously to
the poor, is not to tell the TRUTH but to dodge
it. A change in this habit. however, must
spring from the good sense of the clergyman
and the community in which he lives. And
the first step toward the change is calling at
tention to the subject as the Pittsburgh cler-
gymen have done.-Edy chair. IN HdJper's
| Magazine for July.