Year: 1878

1t was very sensible clergyman at Pitts
burgh who recently read Il paper upon the
expcnsivencss of funerals, and they were
very sensible colleagues who adopted his
views as their opinion. Mere fashion is no.
where more hateful than in the burying OF
the dead, and none the less hateful because
it imposes enormous expenses upon those
who cannot afford them. The savings of a
year are often squandered in the idle osten-
tation Of funeral. 1t is 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 dead member OF it may
lie in a mahogany coffin and be followed by
q long train OF carriages to his grave. Re
form must come from those who "set the
fashion," and q modest simplicity in fune-
rails can be attained only by the example OF
those who can afford to be extrayagant.


The worthy undertaken, who lives by the
death OF his fellow-creatulres, is naturally
desirous that grief shall be lavishly mani
tested, and he encourages 10 the utmost
this sombre splendor. The young Ameri-
can used to be shocked as he read in Eng
lish stories OF mutes and mourning car
riages, of men hired to wear the garb Of
sorrow, and OF grief measured by train Of
emptiness. Two or three years ago the
movement against this extravaganza began
in England, and it has the public sympathy
and support OF very eminent persons. 1t
has shown itself in this country by the COM
mon request, with the announcement OF q
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 per-
sons from their constant association with
funerals. When such gifts are in truth
the offerings OF love and sympathy no SYM
bols can be- more touching, but the moment
they spring from the mere force OF fash
ionable custom, and are sent to the house
Of mourning as gifts are sent by formal ac-
uuaintances to bride, with no more feel
ING than in the leaving of ccremonlous Wis
itins.cards, they are touching and signif.
cant 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 arc
sighted il they are not buried with rulnous
expense.


There was another suggestion made al
Pittsburgh which is worthy OF consldera'
ton. 1t was proposed that funeral ser
mons as matters Of course should not Dt
preached; and to this suggestion there vii
be probably avery general Amen. They arr
of necessity eulogies, for no good-hearted
preacher would choose such time to tell
unpleasant truths. Yet if man has beer
selfish, hard, grasping, self-indulgent
sordid-and there are such men
what is the poor preacher to do


The well-meaning reply that every
person has something good in him, ane
the eulogist can speak OF that, is conclusive
if the preacher is not to give his honest view
of the character Of the dead. But to say ol
| man notorious for meanness that he went
regularly to church, or of a debauchee thai
he gave generously to the poor, is not to tel
the truth, but to dodgeit. A change IN thl!
habit, however, must spring from the goot
sense Of the clergyman and the community
in which he lives. And the first step toward
the chapgeis is calling attention to the subject
us the Pittsburgh clergymen have DONE
Editors Easy Chair, IN Harpes's Magazine
for july.