[Document 96 — 1879.] 
 
 CITY OF MR BOSTON. 
 
 REPORT 
 
 JOINT SPECIAL COMMITTEE 
 
 INTRAMURAL INTERMENTS. 
 
 In Common Council, September 25, 1879. 
 
 The Joint Special Committee to whom was referred the 
 communications from the Board of Health, recommending 
 that further interments in the tombs in King's Chapel and 
 Granary Burying-grounds be prohibited, beg leave to submit 
 the following report : — 
 
 Agreeably to the provisions of Chapter 182 of the Acts of 
 1877, l notice was given to the owners of tombs in the above 
 burying-grounds to appear before the committee at a time 
 specified, and show cause why each aud all of said tombs 
 should not be closed. 
 
 The hearing relating to the Granary Burying-ground was 
 given on the 15th of July last, and, a.t the request of the 
 proprietors of tombs, a second hearing was given on the 31st 
 of July. 
 
 The hearing concerning the King's Chapel Burying-ground 
 was given on the 2 2d of July, and was adjourned to the 4th 
 of September. 
 
 An abstract of the evidence and arguments presented at 
 these hearings will be found in the Appendix. 
 
 The question of prohibiting interments within the limits 
 
 i See page 61. 
 
2 City Document No. 96. 
 
 of the city has been considered by previous City Councils, 
 and the agitation of the subject, as well as a growing sense 
 of the impolicy of permitting such a flagrant violation of 
 sanitary laws, materially aided the establishment of the rural 
 cemeteries which now ornament our suburbs. 
 
 The subject has received considerable attention in other 
 cities of this and of foreign countries, and has resulted in a 
 large amount of legislation. 
 
 Believing that a summary of w T hat has been done in past 
 years may be of interest at this time, the committee present 
 a brief sketch of the history of intramural interments, com- 
 piled from such sources of information as are available. 
 
 The titles of authors quoted are given as far as known, 
 and, for the convenience of those who may desire to consult 
 the originals, the shelf and number of the book in the Bos- 
 ton Public Library are added. 
 
 The principal methods of disposing of the dead from time 
 immemorial have been : — 
 
 1. Interment, or the burial of the body in earth or 
 stone. 
 
 2. Incineration, or the burning of the body and subse- 
 quent entombment of the ashes. 
 
 3. Mummification, or the embalming of the body. 
 
 The origin of each method is enveloped in the mists of 
 antiquity. 
 
 If we accept the theory of the pre-historic origin of man 
 and his gradual development, we may suppose that in his 
 orginal savage state he had little concern in the disposition 
 of the remains of his kindred. They may have been left 
 where they died, without attention, or they may have been 
 devoured by the survivors, in which latter case, as Dr. 
 Adams wittily remarks in his article on cremation and 
 burial, 1 alluding to our pre- Adamite progenitors, "the pros- 
 pect of funeral baked meats must have filled their minds 
 with unhallowed joy." It is probable, however, that when 
 man became sufficiently developed to be sensible of any feel- 
 ing of respect or veneration for the remains of his kindred, 
 inhumation was adopted, and became the general, although 
 not the universal, custom of disposing of the dead. It is 
 certainly the oldest method of which we have any record. 
 
 The Babylonians, Assyrians, Carthaginians, and other 
 great nations of antiquity, buried their dead, and it is 
 believed they did so in consequence of a tradition common 
 among them that the first man was buried. 2 The Hebrews 
 
 1 Cremation and Burial, by J. F. Adams, M.D. Sixth Annual Report State Board 
 of Health, 1875. 
 
 2 Religious Coremonies and Customs, by Wm. Burder, B.A. London, 1851. Boston 
 Public Lib., 3532.7. 
 
Intramural Interments. 3 
 
 practised interment; they had public burying-grounds, and 
 their first care upon arriving in a new country was to set 
 aside a plot of ground for a burial-place. 
 
 The Chinese, from the earliest times, buried their dead, and 
 used coffins long before the Christian era. Their attachment 
 to burial in the earth arises from a belief that the body must 
 rest comfortably in the grave, or misfortune will follow the 
 family. 1 
 
 The early Christians buried their dead in accordance 
 with the Hebrew custom. They objected to cremation on 
 the ground that it involved in it the idea of inhumanity to 
 the body. 2 With the believing Romans inhumation was 
 simply a return to an ancient practice which had never be- 
 come entirely obsolete. As Christianity spread, the nations 
 which were brought under its influence and who had pre- 
 viously disposed of their dead in another manner, adopted 
 this custom as a part of their religion. 
 
 The origin of the practice of incineration is lost in 
 obscurity. It seems to have been most practised in early 
 times, by the most warlike tribes ; hence the belief that it was 
 adopted as a means of protecting the dead from desecration 
 by the enemy. Pliny ascribes the first institution of burning 
 among the Romans to the impossibility of interring human 
 remains left exposed during the wars of the republic, and 
 to their having discovered that the bodies of those who fell 
 in distant wars were dug up and treated with indignity by 
 the northern barbarians. In some places it was undoubtedly 
 resorted to from sanitary motives, and in others it was prac- 
 tised as a religious rite, from a belief in the purifying influ- 
 ence of fire. In Asia it was extensively practised, and the 
 Egyptians adopted it after they abandoned mummification, 
 about the sixth century. It was extensively practised by 
 the Greeks and Romans in historical times ; but in both 
 countries it was preceded by inhumation, and at no time 
 did it entirely supersede the latter method. 
 
 It is not positively known when the Greeks adopted the 
 custom ; they are supposed to have learned it from the Thra- 
 cians, who inherited it from their progenitors, the Scythians. 
 The institutes of Lycurgus (B.C. 900) specify the manner 
 in which burial was to be performed. In the fifth century 
 B.C. it would seem that cremation and burial were both 
 practised, for Plato makes Socrates say that he did not care 
 whether he was burned or buried. 
 
 The Romans adopted the custom of burning from the 
 
 1 Dr. Eatwell. 
 
 2 Dr. John Jamieson, On the Origin of Cremation. Trans. Royal Society of Edin- 
 burgh. Vol. viii, 1817. Boston Pub. Lib., E. 163.1, vol. viii. 
 
4 City Document No. 96. 
 
 Greeks. At first it seems to have been reserved for persons 
 of distinction and wealth ; but after the cremation of Cor- 
 nelius Sylla (B.C. 676) the practice became more general. 
 It reached its height in the latter days of the republic, and 
 became obsolete in the fourth century, after Christianity be- 
 came fully established. 1 Children who had not cut their 
 teeth, and persons killed by lightning, were not burned, but 
 buried. 2 Cremation is still extensively practised in Hindos- 
 tan and other Eastern countries, as well as by a number of 
 uncivilized tribes in different parts of the world. 
 
 During the present century, attempts have been made in 
 Europe and America to revive the custom, but as yet without 
 much success. 3 
 
 Mummification was practised, to some extent, by several 
 ancient nations, especially by the Egyptians, who embalmed 
 all their dead. It is estimated that 400,000,000 human 
 mummies were made in Egypt, from the beginning of the 
 art of embalming until its discontinuance in the seventh 
 century. 4 
 
 The ancieut Peruvians dried their dead in the sun, and 
 interred them in a sitting posture, bound in cloth, the quan- 
 tity of saltpetre in the ground completing the desiccation, — 
 a system analogous to embalmment. 3 
 
 From the teachings of history and tradition, we may con- 
 clude that the custom of burying the dead has come down 
 to us from the remotest ages, and though at different peri- 
 ods other methods have prevailed, interment has been the 
 final lot of a vast majority of the human race. 
 
 To the three methods of disposing of the dead which have 
 been recited was due the establishment of the burying- 
 ground and cemetery. 
 
 At first the dead were probably buried in natural caverns, 
 or, perhaps, in a rude grave, marked by a simple mound or 
 a rough stone. In proportion as man became more enlight- 
 ened his respect and veneration for the dead increased, and 
 sought expression in the memorials which marked their last 
 resting-places. The mound and stone increased in size until 
 the}' grew into the vast tumuli and huge monoliths, which 
 stand to-day as the only evidences of a pre-historic race. 
 The development of art w r as stimulated by this desire to 
 honor the dead, and mural decoration furnished an early op- 
 portunity for employment to the pencil and chisel. In por- 
 
 1 Adams. 
 1 Burden. 
 
 3 For a bibliography and historical sketch of Cremation, see Cremation of the Dead, 
 its history and bearings upon Public Health. William Eassie, C. E., London, 1875. 
 Boston Pub. Lib., 3975.55. 
 
 4 Appleton's Enc. 
 
Intramural Interments. 5 
 
 traying the history of the dead, the artist unconsciously 
 wrote, for future generations, the story of the living. 
 
 When men began to live in settled communities the dis- 
 position of the remains of the dead became a matter of 
 prime importance. The Romans originally used their dwell- 
 ings as tombs for their deceased relatives. The same prac- 
 tice prevailed among the early Greeks. 
 
 The Thebans had a law that no one should build a house 
 without providing a repository for the dead. 1 Among the 
 Egyptians the body, having been embalmed, was returned to 
 the relatives, who enclosed it in a wooden case, made to re- 
 semble a human figure, and placed it in the repository of 
 their dead. 2 Experience, however, in course of time, dem- 
 onstrated the danger of these customs, and led to the enact- 
 ment of laws, by which intramural interments were gener- 
 ally prohibited. The privilege was only accorded to holy 
 men, or those who were regarded as public benefactors, or 
 had rendered eminent services to the community. 
 
 The Romans permitted vestal virgins, and some illustrious 
 men, to be buried within the city. The right of making a 
 sepulchre for himself within the Pomeerium was decreed to 
 Julius Caesar, as a singular privilege. 3 
 
 The Roman law of the twelve tables, enacted about the 
 fourth century, expressly forbade the burial or burning of 
 the dead within the city, and continued in force many years. 
 
 The Greeks had similar laws. The Lacedemonians were, 
 however, an exception. Lycurgus taught them to bury with- 
 in the limits of the city, both for the purpose of removing 
 the prevalent belief that the touch of a dead body conveyed 
 pollution ; and also to encourage the youths to deeds of valor, 
 by familiarizing them with the spectacle of death. 
 
 Burying-grounds were established without the limits of the 
 cities, usually near the highways, and the dead deposited 
 either in the earth or in tombs, more or less magnificent, ac- 
 cording: to the rank and condition of the deceased. 
 
 When burning prevailed, the ashes were placed in cine- 
 rary urns, and deposited in niches cut in the walls of the 
 sepulchre, called columbaria. 
 
 In Egypt the accumulation of mummies within the cities 
 caused a serious epidemic, and led to their being deposited 
 in catacombs and pyramids outside the limits of habitation. 
 
 Severe penalties were enacted against the desecration of 
 burial-places. This, however, did not prevent the interven- 
 tion of the authorities, when required by the public welfare. 
 
 i Jamieeon. 
 
 2 Intramural Interments in Populous Cities, and their influence upon health and 
 epidemics, by John H. Rauch, M.D., Chicago, 1866. Boston Pub. Lib., 6796.43. 
 
 3 Burder. 
 
6 City Document No. 96. 
 
 The vast number of interments in the burying-ground for 
 the poor people of Rome having rendered the neighborhood 
 unhealthy, Augustus, with the consent of the Senate and 
 people, gave a part of it to his favorite Maecenas, who built 
 there a magnificent house, with extensive gardens, whence 
 it became one of the most healthy situations in Rome. 1 
 
 The growth of Christianity brought about radical changes 
 in respect to the interment of the dead. At first the Chris- 
 tians, a despised and persecuted sect, buried their dead in 
 catacombs, excavated in the hills about the city of Rome. 
 There were, in the third century, twenty-five or twenty-six 
 of these, corresponding with the number of parishes within 
 the city, and measuring, in the aggregate, about three hun- 
 dred and fifty miles in length. 2 As the sect grew in power, 
 and churches became established, the Roman law against 
 intramural interments was occasionally disregarded, in the 
 case of persons eminent for piety, or services to the church, 
 although the church herself authoritatively ever set her face 
 against the innovation of burial within the churches, or even 
 within the city. Constantine is said to be the first person in- 
 terred within the church edifice, and even he was not deemed 
 worthy to approach nearer than the outer court or porch. 
 At first the privilege was only accorded to such as these ; 
 but at length the desire to be buried within the sacred pre- 
 cincts, and near the relics of the saints and martyrs, became 
 so great that the power of wealth was freely exercised, and 
 the privilege was purchased by splendid gifts to the church. 
 The civil authorities were sensible of the danger of the prac- 
 tice, and legislated against it several times. In 381 the 
 Emperor Tlieodosius explicitly prohibited interments in 
 cities, and ordered the removal of the remains. The pro- 
 hibition was subsequently embodied in the Justinian Code, 
 and it was not until 509 that formal permission was obtained 
 to establish the first Christian cemetery in Rome. 
 
 Burials in churches became more frequent from this time 
 forth, and the health of the worshippers became seriously 
 endangered by the emanations from the decomposing re- 
 mains. The bodies of prelates and dignitaries of the church, 
 and of eminent laymen, were buried inside the walls. Those 
 less fortunate, or less powerful and wealthy, were laid in the 
 enclosure around the church. 
 
 Thus originated the graveyard of the present day ; an evil 
 gradual in its growth, but at last attaining such magnitude 
 that its deleterious effect upon the public health again de- 
 manded the intervention of the authorities. 
 
 1 Burder. 8 Adams. 
 
Intramural Interments. 7 
 
 After the sixth century the custoni of interring the dead 
 in and around churches became almost universal in the West, 
 notwithstanding frequent efforts were made to abolish 
 it. In the East the ancient prohibition was more rigorously 
 maintained, although exceptions were occasionally made in 
 the case of important personages. Toward the close of the 
 eighth century Charlemagne employed himself in restoring 
 the ancient ecclesiastical discipline. Councils were fre- 
 quently assembled, and from these emanated the capitularies 
 or public statutes, established by the concurrence of civil 
 and ecclesiastical authorities. These statutes forbade the 
 interment within churches of all persons whatsoever. 
 
 It does not appear, however, that these edicts were suffi- 
 cient to prevent the practice ; for we find that more than 
 twenty synods and councils, convened at different periods 
 from the ninth to the seventeenth century, protested against 
 it; but without avail. 1 
 
 In the fifteenth century the magistracy of Nuremburg 
 provided for the burial of the dead outside the city ; and at 
 a later period, in 1541, they forbade interments within auy 
 church in the city. Interments in the city of Vienna were 
 forbidden during the reign of Maria Theresa, about 1730. 
 In Paris, in 1765, the nuisance became so intolerable that 
 the Parliament of Paris decreed the closing of the church- 
 yards for five years, and the opening of cemeteries out- 
 side the city. This decree was occasioned by an almost 
 universal complaint from the inhabitants of parishes of the 
 noisome and sickly influence of churches and cemeteries. 2 
 This was not sufficient, and, in 1774, the same authority was 
 compelled to issue another decree against the opening of 
 vaults for the admission of bodies. 
 
 Louis XV. concurred in the prohibition of graveyards in 
 Paris, and granted to the parish of St. Louis, at Versailles, 
 a piece of land in the forest of Sartoris to be used as a ceme- 
 tery. Louis XVI., in 1776, prohibited graveyards in cities 
 and towns ; but made an exception in favor of clergy, lords, 
 and patrons of churches, who were allowed to be buried 
 under vaults, the bodies to be placed six feet under the 
 lower pavement. 
 
 In 1777 a general disinterment was commenced in Paris, 
 beginning with the Cemetery of the Innocents, and the re- 
 mains were removed to the catacombs under the city. 
 
 The National Assembly, in 1790, commanded towns and 
 villages to discontinue the use of their old burial-places, and 
 
 1 London Quarterly Review, Vol. 73. Boston Pub. Lib., 3134.1. 
 
 2 An Exposition of tbo Dangers of Interments in Cities, by Felix Pascalis, M.D., 
 New York, 1823. Boston Pub. Lib., Medioal Pampblets, 18. 
 
8 City Document No. 96. 
 
 form others at a distance from their habitations. In 1804 
 four cemeteries were authorized in the vicinity of Paris, and 
 in 1874 it was found necessary to establish a new one at 
 Mery-sur-Oise, twelve miles from the city. 
 
 The example of France in interdicting intramural inter- 
 ments was followed by other countries on the continent of 
 Europe. The influence of physicians and a better knowledge 
 of sanitary hiws have resulted in the gradual closing of the 
 old burial-places and the establishment of rural cemeteries. 
 
 In Great Britain the subject of intramural interments re- 
 ceived but little attention until within the last thirty-seven 
 years, although the evil effect upon the public health was 
 noticed many years before. In 1721 an anonymous pam- 
 phlet was published in London, entitled, w Seasonable 
 Considerations on the Indecent and Dangerous Custom of 
 Burying in Churches and Churchyards ;" but it does not 
 seem to have led to any action on the part of the authorities. 
 In 1740 a pestilential fever raged in Dublin, which was 
 distinctly traced by the authorities to the exhalations from 
 the gravej T ards, and they were ordered to be removed out of 
 the city. 
 
 In 1839 Mr. George Alfred Walker, a London surgeon, 
 published a work on the condition of the graveyards of Lon- 
 don, which attracted much attention, and led to the appoint- 
 ment by Parliament of a select committee of fifteen " to 
 consider the expediency of framing some legislative enact- 
 ments to remedy the evils arising from the interment of 
 bodies within the precincts of large towns, or of places 
 densely populated." 
 
 This committee reported on the 14th of June, 1842, ex- 
 pressing the opinion that the practice of interment within 
 the precincts of large towns is injurious to the health of the 
 inhabitants thereof, and frequently offensive to public de- 
 cency, and recommending that intramural interments, with 
 some exceptions, be prohibited. 1 
 
 A Supplementary Report on the Results of a Special In- 
 quiry into the Practice of Interments in Towns, by Edwin 
 Chadwick, was presented to the Home Department in 1843. 
 From the evidence on the subject Mr. Chadwick arrives at 
 the following conclusions : " That, inasmuch as there ap- 
 pear to be no cases in which the emanations from human 
 remains, in an advanced state of decomposition, are not of a 
 deleterious nature, so there is no case in which the liability to 
 danger should be incurred, either by interment or by entomb- 
 ment in vaults, which is the most dangerous, amidst the 
 
 i Boston Pub. Lib., 5760.50. 
 
Intramural Interments. 9 
 
 dwellings of the living, — it being established, as a general 
 conclusion, in respect to the physical circumstances of inter- 
 ment, from which no adequate grounds of exception have 
 been established, that all interments in towns, where bodies 
 decompose, contribute to the mass of atmospheric impurity, 
 which is injurious to the public health." 1 
 
 The National Society for the abolition of burial in towns 
 was formed in 1845. The address of the society, which 
 called for "a decided expression of public opinion," was 
 distributed in circular form throughout the kingdom. 
 
 In 1849 the Asiatic cholera destroyed no less than lfi,000 
 persons in London alone, and the General Board of Health, 
 consisting of Carlisle, Ashley, Edwin Chadwick, and T. S. 
 Smith, was directed to cause inquiry to be made into the 
 state of burial-grounds, and frame, if necessary, a scheme 
 to be submitted to Parliament for the improvement of inter- 
 ment in towns. Their report, submitted in 1850, takes de- 
 cided ground against the practice of intramural interments. 2 
 
 In 1851 a report on a general scheme of extra-mural 
 sepulture for country towns was made to Parliament by 
 Carlisle, Ashley, Chadwick, and Smith. These reports had 
 the effect of bringing about the required legislation. 2 
 
 In 1806 the Board of Health of New York city appointed 
 a committee, consisting of Dr. Edward Miller and Messrs. 
 John Pintard and Winart Van Zant, to report on measures 
 necessary to secure the health of the city. This committee 
 recommended that interments in the city be prohibited, and 
 suggested that " the present burial-grounds might serve ex- 
 tremely well for plantations of grove and forest trees, and 
 thereby, instead of remaining receptacles of putrefying mat- 
 ter and hot-beds of miasmata, might be rendered useful and 
 ornamental to the city." 3 This report was instrumental in 
 causing the passage of a law, which authorized the corpora- 
 tion of New York to regulate, and, if necessary, to prevent 
 the interment of the dead within the city. It does not ap- 
 pear that this law was ever enforced. In 1822 the yellow 
 fever prevailed in New York to an alarming extent, and the 
 virulence of the disease in the vicinity of Trinity Church 
 awakened fresh interest in the subject of intramural inter- 
 ments. Dr. F. D. Allen published a pamphlet on the sub- 
 ject, 4 in which he cites numerous cases of disease attributable 
 to the exhalations from graveyards. In 1823 Dr. Felix 
 Pascalis published " An Exposition of the Dangers of Inter- 
 
 1 Boston Pub. Lib., 7063.9. 
 » Boiton Pub. Lib., 7063.5. 
 
 * On Interments witbin the Populous Parts of the City of New York, 1806. 
 
 * Documents and Facts showing tbo Fatal Effects of Interments in Populous Cities. 
 Boiton Public Library Medical Pamphlets, 11. 
 
10 City Document No. 96. 
 
 ment in Cities," 1 which to this day is an authority on the 
 subject. An ordinance was passed prohibiting interments 
 within the city of New York, but remained inoperative for a 
 long time. The establishment of Greenwood Cemetery in 
 1842, and since then of other rural cemeteries, led to the 
 gradual discontinuance of the old burying-grounds, and now 
 interments within the limits of the city are prohibited by law. 
 
 The regulation of the interment of the dead in Boston was 
 vested in the selectmen until 1809, when by vote of the 
 town it was transferred to the Board of Health. In 1797 
 an act (C. 16, 1797) was passed, authorizing towns and dis- 
 tricts to appoint a Health Committee, consisting of not less 
 than five nor more than nine persons. This is probably the 
 origin of Boards of Health in this Commonwealth. At a 
 meeting of the town, December 5, 1798, the representatives 
 were directed to apply to the General Court for a Board of 
 Health. In 1799 an act was passed repealing so much of 
 the Act of 1797 as related to the Town of Boston, and pro- 
 viding for the election by the people of a Board of Health, 
 consisting of one member from each ward of the town. This 
 Board, however, had nothing to do with the burial of the 
 dead, until, as before stated, it was transferred to them by 
 vote of the town in 1809. At a meeting of the selectmen, 
 January 17, 1810, a communication was received from the 
 Board of Health, expressing their willingness to accept the 
 care of the burying-grounds. The first printed regulations 
 of the Board are dated May 7, 1810. They divided the 
 burying-grounds and cemeteries into three districts, viz. : 
 the North District, comprising the North Burying-ground 
 and Christ Church Cemetery ; the Middle District, compris- 
 ing the Granary and Chapel Burying-grounds and Chapel 
 and Trinity Church Cemeteries ; South District, comprising 
 the Central and South Burying-grounds. A superintendent 
 was appointed over each district. The superintendents were 
 required to cause tombs which were opened between the 
 1st of July and 30th of September to be closed and pointed 
 with lime within twenty-four hours after the deposit of 
 bodies therein ; to cause at least three bushels of lime to be 
 slaked in each cemetery on the 1st and 15th days of July, 
 August, and September. The top of any coffin was not al- 
 lowed to be placed within three feet of the surface of the 
 ground. The bottom of the first coffin placed in any grave 
 must be at least eight feet from the surface of the ground. 
 The regulations further declared that after the first of the fol- 
 lowing July (1810) the old part of the North Burying-ground. 
 
 1 Boston Public Library Medical Pamphlets, 18. 
 
Intramural Interments. 11 
 
 (except for the interment of people of color) and the whole 
 of the Central Burying-ground, should be closed, and con- 
 tinue closed for ten years. Minute regulations were pre- 
 scribed for the conduct of funerals, etc. 
 
 These regulations were continued, with slight changes, 
 until the abolition of the Board of Health, in 1824. 
 
 The city charter provided that power and authority vested 
 by law in the Board of Health should be transferred to the 
 City Council, "to be carried into execution by the appoint- 
 ment of Health Commissioners, or in such other manner as 
 the health, cleanliness, comfort, and order of the said city 
 may in their judgment require. " Soon after the inaugura- 
 tion of the City Government a Board of Temporary Health 
 Commissioners was appointed (May 3, 1822). A con- 
 flict of authority soon arose between the Board of Health and 
 the City Council, which continued until May 31, 1824, 
 when an ordinance was passed abolishing the Board and vesting 
 the duties in a Commissioner of Health and Superintendent 
 of Burial-Ground and Cemeteries, acting under the direction 
 of the Board of Mayor and Aldermen. All matters relating 
 to the interment of the dead were placed in charge of the said 
 Superintendent. As no new regulations were adopted at 
 that time, it is presumed that the old regulations continued 
 in force until December 25, 1826, when an ordinance relat- 
 ing to the subject of interring the dead was passed. The 
 rules prescribed by this ordinance differed but little from 
 those previously in force. The seventh section provided 
 that the Central, Chapel, and Granary Burying-grounds 
 should be so far closed that no new graves should be opened 
 or dug therein, nor tombs built, until the further order of 
 the Mayor and Aldermen ; and that the old part of the North 
 Burying-ground should be so far closed that no new graves 
 should be opened or dug therein. Permission might be 
 obtained from the Mayor and Aldermen to build tombs in the 
 new part of the North Burying-ground and in the South 
 Burying-ground. No graves or tombs could be opened from 
 the 1st day of June to the 1st day of October, except for the 
 purpose of interring the dead, without permission of the 
 Mayor and Aldermen. 
 
 The burying-grounds and cemeteries remained in charge 
 of the Mayor and Aldermen until the organization of the 
 Board of Health, in 1872. In 1849 the ofl3ce of Super- 
 intendent of Burial-grounds and Cemeteries was abolished 
 and that of City Registrar created. An ordinance passed 
 August 20, 1850, provided that no graves shall be opened 
 or dug in any of the burying-grounds in the city, excepting 
 at East Boston and South Boston, unless by permission of 
 
12 City Document No. 96. 
 
 the Mayor and Aldermen, or the City Registrar. By ordi- 
 nance of Oct. 14, 1869, the exception in favor of East 
 and South Boston was removed. The present regulations 
 in regard to the interment of the dead will be found on 
 pages 413 to 417, inclusive, of the edition of laws and ordi- 
 nances for 1876. 
 
 The first burial-place in Boston was what is now known 
 as the King's Chapel Burying-ground, and the first interment 
 therein was made in 1630. For thirty years it was the only 
 burial-place in the town. In 1660 a lot of land on Charter 
 and Snowhill streets was purchased and set apart for a 
 burying-ground, and in the same year another burying- 
 ground was established on the Common, which then extended 
 as far north as Beacon street. The first lot referred to wag 
 the beginning of what is now called Copp's Hill Burying- 
 ground, then known as the North Burying-ground. The 
 lot on the Common was known as the South Burying-ground 
 until about 1737, when it began to be called the Granary 
 Burying-ground, because the old Granary building was 
 removed that year from its former location to the present 
 site of the Park-street Church, marking the southern termi- 
 nation of the burying-ground. In 1660 the town ordered 
 that the old burying-ground should be " wholly deserted for 
 a season, and the new places appointed for burying only 
 made use of." In 1708-9 and in 1711 additional land was 
 purchased for the enlargement of the North Burying-ground. 
 In 1810 the new North Burying-ground Avas established on 
 land adjoining the old ground. In 1819 thirty-four tombs 
 were built by Hon. Charles Wells, in a small yard adjoining 
 the old ground, and called the Charter-street Burying-ground. 
 The division fences between the two last-named lots and the 
 old ground have been removed, and it is to all appearances 
 one burying-ground. In 1832 a row of tombs was erected 
 in what was called the Hull-street Cemetery, bordering on 
 the north-west 8ide of the old ground. This cemetery was 
 discontinued in 1853, and the remains were removed to 
 Mount Hope Cemetery in 1861. 
 
 The South Burying-ground was sometimes called the Com- 
 mon Burying-ground, from its location, and sometimes the 
 Middle Burying-ground, because it was situated in the mid- 
 dle burial district, Copp's Hill forming the north, and the 
 Boylston-street Burying-ground the south. It is, however, 
 better known as the Granary Burying-ground. Originally 
 the graves were only made at the westerly and northerly part 
 of the yard. The oldest tombs were built near the back 
 part of the yard, and, with the contiguous graves, occupy 
 about one-quarter of the burial-ground. 
 
Intramural Interments. 13 
 
 On the 15th of May, 1717, a vote was passed by the 
 townsmen, "to enlarge the South Burying-ground by taking 
 in part of the highway on the easterly side thereof, so as 
 that thereby y e said highway be not thereby too much strait- 
 ened." 
 
 On the 19th of April, 1719, it was "Ordered, That the 
 South burying-place should be enlarged next the Common or 
 training-field." Under this Inst vote fifteen tombs were 
 built near the extreme south-west corner of the yard, and 
 extended in a line on the south side. 
 
 In 1722 six tombs were built on the same line, extending 
 easterly. The other tombs on the southerly side, fifteen in 
 number, were built during the years 1723, 1724, and 1725 ; 
 the first thirty on the easterly side, in the years 1726, 1727, 
 and 1728, and the northerly thirteen in 1736. Of those on 
 the northerly side, the first five were built in 1738, and the 
 remaining twenty-six in 1810, and twenty-six were built on 
 the westerly side during the same and next three years. 
 There are sixty other tombs within the yard, which do not 
 border upon either of its sides, one of which belongs to the 
 city. In one respect the selection of the site for this ceme- 
 tery was particularly unfortunate. The soil was springy 
 and exceedingly damp, and, therefore, required drainage. 
 It is said that when Judge Sullivan, at the close of the last 
 century, repaired the Bellingham tomb, he found the coffin 
 and remains of the old governor — who died on the 7th 
 December, 1672 — floating around in the ancient vault. 
 
 The fourth burying-ground in point of antiquity was the 
 Quaker burying-ground, situated on Congress street. It 
 was established in 1709, and was discontinued in 1815. In 
 1826, by permission of the Board of Aldermen, the remains 
 were exhumed and conveyed to Lynn, excepting the bodies 
 of two persons, which were deposited in King's Chapel Ceme- 
 tery. 
 
 In 1740 the selectmen received a petition from John 
 Chambers and others, grave-diggers, representing "that the 
 Old and South burying-places are so filled with dead bodies, 
 they are obliged, ofttimes, to bury them four deep, praying 
 it may be laid before the town for their consideration." This 
 caused the town authorities to look for a new burial-place ; 
 but it was not until 1754 that a location was decided upon. 
 On the 11th of October of that year the town voted to pur- 
 chase a pasture at the foot of the Common, and in 1756 the 
 purchase was consummated. Here was established the South 
 Burying-ground, afterwards known as the Common Burying- 
 ground until 1810, when, in consequence of the establish- 
 ment of the burial-place on Washington street, it was des- 
 
14 City Document No. 96. 
 
 ignated as the Central Burying-ground. The first interments 
 in this lot were made in graves. The first tomb was erected 
 in x 1793, as far as can be ascertained. From this time until 
 1800 a few were built each year. In 1801, 2, and 3, a large 
 number were built. Boylston street then formed one boun- 
 dary of the lot, but in 1839 two rows of tombs on that 
 side were discontinued, and the Boylston-street mall laid out. 
 Tombs were built on the westerly side, to compensate for 
 those which were discontinued. 
 
 In 1795 a committee was appointed by the town to con- 
 sider the subject of the burying-ground s at large, and to 
 report on some suitable place of deposit for the dead, in 
 order that the town may be enabled to discontinue the open- 
 ing of graves in the Common and Chapel Burying-grounds, 
 The committee reported on the 6th of November, 1795. 
 that, n having consulted the physicians of the town, they 
 find it to be, in their opinion, that the health of the inhabi- 
 tants is in danger from the crowded state of these grounds, 
 and the exhalations which must frequently arise from open- 
 ing graves therein. In addition to which, they find it is 
 almost impossible to open new graves without disturbing the 
 relics of the dead already interred. From an equal regard 
 to health, for a decent respect for the living and the dead, 
 they recommend to the inhabitants to adopt the following 
 measures : — 
 
 "First. That no graves or new tombs shall be opened or 
 built in either the Common or Chapel Burying-ground, after 
 the first day of May next. 
 
 "Second. As the South Burying-ground is already suffi- 
 ciently large for the present accommodation of the inhabitants, 
 and will admit of such enlargement, that the Selectmen be 
 empowered to allot to any inhabitant who may apply for the 
 same, sufficient ground for erecting a tomb in the ground, 
 and to enlarge the said South Burying-ground in a direction 
 westerly whenever the public convenience shall in their judg- 
 ment require it. 
 
 "Third. Inasmuch as in remarkably inclement weather it 
 may be inconvenient for funerals to proceed to the South 
 Burying-ground, that the selectmen cause to be erected under 
 the vestry-room of the stone chapel, or in some other part 
 of the Chapel Burying-ground, a vault or tomb suitable for 
 temporary deposit, in which any of the inhabitants who may 
 incline thereto shall have the right to deposit the bodies of 
 their deceased friends or relatives, for a term of time not 
 exceeding twenty-four hours (unless in particular cases), by 
 permission of the selectmen, until it may be convenient for 
 them to remove such bodies to the place of final interment." 
 
Intramural Interments. 15 
 
 The report was accepted by the town. 
 
 The South Burying-ground, on Washington street, was 
 opened for burials in 1810. It was formerly the location of 
 the gallows, and culprits were generally buried in deep 
 graves within the cemetery, near the place of their execution. 
 A large portion of it was marshy, and consequently wet, and 
 hardly fit for purposes of sepulture. Until 1827 inter- 
 ments were made in graves. In that year tombs were first 
 built at the sides of the yard, and from year to year others 
 were erected, until the number amounted to one hundred and 
 sixty-two. In 1837 a large quantity of proper soil was 
 carted upon it, and the surface graded. In 18(36 the tombs 
 on the northerly side were discontinued, and a strip of land 
 ceded to an abutter on that side for yard-room, and another 
 portion for a hotel . 
 
 In addition to these burying-grounds there have been five 
 cemeteries built beneath church edifices in the city proper. 
 That under Christ Church, Salem street, contains thirty- 
 three tombs. Interments were made here very soon after 
 the erection of the church, in 1723. The first Trinity 
 Church, a wooden building, consecrated in 1735, contained 
 twenty-five tombs. The new church, consecrated in 1829, 
 and destroyed by fire November 9, 1872, contained fifty-five 
 tombs. After the fire the remains were removed by the 
 friends and families of the deceased. 
 
 The original King's Chapel, erected about 1688, contained 
 several tombs, but the exact number is not known. The 
 present building, erected iu 1749-50, contained twenty 
 tombs in the basement, and a large vault, called the stranger's 
 tomb, under the tower. 
 
 St. Paul's Church contains sixty-four tombs. In December, 
 1822, the proprietors of St. Paul's petitioned for leave to 
 use the cellar of the building for interring the dead, giving 
 as a reason that, having erected the church at great expense, 
 they had incurred a debt, from which they could not be re- 
 lieved unless their prayer was granted. Formal permission 
 was granted September 1, 1823, and the cemetery has been 
 in use since that time. By chapter 28, Acts of the year 
 1879, further interment in these tombs was prohibited, and 
 preparations are being made to remove the remains to 
 another resting-place. 1 
 
 In January, 1823, the proprietors of Park- street Church 
 petitioned the City Council for leave to erect tombs under 
 their church, and the petition was granted. Thirty tombs 
 were built. In 1862 the cemetery was discontinued, and the 
 
 iThis historical sketch of the burying-grounds and cemeteries of Boston is compiled 
 mainly from ShurtlefFs Topographical Description of Boston. Boston, 1871. Boston 
 Pub. Lib., 4451.20. 
 
16 City Document No. 96. 
 
 remains removed to Mount Auburn and deposited in a lot 
 purchased by the society for the purpose. 
 
 In June, 1823, the proprietors of Bromfield-street Church 
 petitioned for a like privilege. This drew the attention of 
 the City Council to the subject, and the petition was referred 
 to a committee, of which the Mayor, Josiah Quincy, was 
 chairman, to consider the expediency of granting such a 
 right. This committee reported adversely to the petitioners, 
 in a very able report, which may be found in Volume 1 of 
 the City Kecords. In concluding their report the committee 
 recommended the prohibition of the erection of new tombs 
 within the ancient peninsula of Boston ; the adoption of 
 measures ultimately tending to exclude all burials hereafter 
 within the peninsula, and devising methods for applying the 
 only perfect and satisfactory remedy, by adopting some com- 
 mon place of burial for all the inhabitants ; selected, if pos- 
 sible, beyond the limits of the city, but certainly beyond the 
 limits of the peninsula, of an extent sufficient to meet the 
 future exigencies of the population. The resolutions 
 embodying these recommendations were adopted by the 
 City Council. 
 
 Interments, however, continued to be made in the several 
 burying-grounds, although from time to time vigorous pro- 
 tests against the practice appeared in the public prints. In 
 1831 Mount Auburn Cemetery was established, and this in 
 some degree met the wants of the constantly increasing 
 population of the city. The records of the city are 
 silent upon the subject until 1847, when the following 
 appears in the inaugural gddress of the Mayor (Josiah 
 Quincy, Jr.) : — 
 
 Another subject which demands your attention is the burial of the 
 dead in the city. There are reasons connected both with health and the 
 natural feelings of man that have caused almost all large cities to forbid 
 interments within their limits, except under particular circumstances. 
 In our own no burials are made in graves. There are in the city, in- 
 cluding one at South Boston, not used, nine burial-places, containing 
 nine hundred and thirty-three tombs. There are six churches with 
 cemeteries below them, containing two hundred and seventy-nine tombs, 
 making in all one thousand two hundred and twelve tombs. As it respects 
 tombs owned by families I would suggest the propriety of preventing 
 any bodies being deposited in them excepting members of the family, 
 and of fixing a time after which no interments whatever should be 
 made. As to the tombs belonging to undertakers and others, where 
 bodies are deposited on the payment of a fee, and where it has been the 
 practice after a few years to remove the remains to make way for others, 
 and thus render them a source of constant income, I recommend that 
 it be ordained that these and all tombs, when once filled, shall be closed 
 forever. This is due to the health and feelings of the living, and to the 
 respect due to the dead. This may in time render it necessary to pro- 
 vide burial-places out of the city, which by charging a small fee for the 
 rights of sepulchre, could be done without expense to the city, and 
 
Intramural Interments. 17 
 
 would at least enable the poor man, when he died, to feel that his dust 
 was to rest in a quiet grave. 
 
 In 1849 Mayor Bigelow, in his inaugural address, refer- 
 ring to a threatened visitation of the cholera, says : — 
 
 In this connection, I would renew the suggestions of my honored 
 predecessor in reference to burials within the limits of our dense popu- 
 lation. Upon this point of economical regulation we are entirely 
 behind the age. The average annual number of deaths for some years 
 has exceeded three thousand five hundred. Making all allowances for 
 interments in Mount Auburn, and other suburban cemeteries, there 
 cannot be much less than two thousand human bodies annually con- 
 signed to their rest within the boundaries of Boston, — all deposited in 
 tombs. Such an amount of accumulating decomposition cannot but 
 tend, in some degree, to impair the purity of the atmosphere ; and the 
 evil, as our population increases, will daily become more serious. It 
 cannot be doubted that a desirable burial lot may be obtained at no great 
 distance from Boston, and in the vicinity of some of our numerous rail- 
 roads, which would furnish ample facilities for conveyance of funeral 
 trains. The example of the enlightened city T of Roxbury, 1 in this 
 respect, is worthy of our imitation. For a lot, similar to that recently 
 consecrated there, the expense would be inconsiderable, and would soon 
 be liquidated by charging a small fee for the right of sepulture. 
 
 The committee to whom this address was referred reported 
 in April, 1849, recommending the passage of an ordinance, 
 prohibiting burials in any part of South Boston north of 
 Dorchester and east of Seventh streets, excepting in the 
 tombs of Saint Matthew's Church. Appended to this report 
 are the depositions of several persons in regard to the dan- 
 gerous condition of one of the burying-grounds in South 
 Boston. 2 
 
 This committee afterwards obtained the passage of an act 
 (chap. 150, 1849), authorizing the City of Boston to estab- 
 lish a public cemetery in any town in the Commonwealth 
 (the consent of the town to be first obtained), and to make 
 and establish all suitable rules, orders, and regulations for the 
 interment of the dead therein. 
 
 On the 27th of September, 1849, this committee reported 
 that they had obtained this act, and recommended the passage 
 of an order, authorizing them to purchase a suitable lot of 
 land, without the limits of the city, at an expense not 
 exceeding $25,000. 
 
 The committee again reported, on the 11th of October, 
 1849, 3 giving their views of a plan for a cemetery, and urging 
 the passage of the order which they had previously offered. 
 The committee say : " The committee believe it to be con- 
 
 1 Alluding to the establishment by Roxbury of Forost Hill Cemetery. 
 
 2 City Document No. 28, 1849. 
 
 3 City Document No. 51, 1849. 
 
18 City Document No. 96. 
 
 ceded by all, that no more interments should take place 
 within the limits of the City of Boston, . . . the rea- 
 sons for which must be obvious. . . . The increasing 
 growth of our population, the limited amount of soil pos- 
 sessed by us, the evidences, furnished by all preceding gen- 
 erations, of the poisonous nature of the decomposing matter 
 of human bodies, all conspire to render this a fixed fact." 
 
 The committee quote an article which appeared in the 
 London " Times " of December 29, 1848, on intramural inter- 
 ments, which says: "This subject is incomparably painful 
 and revolting, but it is, at the same time, of such importance 
 to the health of the community, that it must be enforced 
 upon the public attention again and again. Any measure for 
 the health of the metropolis, which shall not include as one 
 of its principal features an absolute veto upon intramural 
 interments, will be incomplete and ineffective. Let no one 
 deceive himself with the idea that, however fortunately he 
 may be placed, he is preserved from the danger of infection 
 from this source." 
 
 The committee express their firm conviction, that the voice 
 of reason and Christianity both call aloud and demand of the 
 City Government the immediate passage of a law which shall 
 close, at once and forever, the burial-grounds, as well as all 
 other places of interment, within the city limits. 
 
 During the following December the same committee made 
 another report, giving the results of their endeavors to 
 secure a suitable lot for a cemetery. 1 A list of the lots 
 which they examined is given, and they recommend the pur- 
 chase of a lot in Maiden. They again urge the passage of 
 the order making the appropriation. 
 
 The subject was finally referred to the next City Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 In his inaugural address for 1850, Mayor Bigelow again 
 alluded to the subject, as follows : — 
 
 I would again call the attention of the City Council to the necessity 
 of making early and adequate provision, beyond the boundaries of the 
 city, for the burial of the dead. Every one of our cemeteries is already 
 full, to an extent which, to a greater or less degree, is prejudicial to the 
 public health. Indeed, during the prevalence of the epidemic it became 
 necessary to disuse several of our burying-grounds, not really on 
 account of offensive exhalations, but for want of actual space for addi- 
 tional interments. This state of things is discreditable to Boston, and 
 is inconsistent with a due regard to the safety of its citizens. It may 
 easily be remedied without involving any very large expenditure. 
 
 This part of the address was referred to a special com- 
 mittee, who were also requested to examine existing ordi- 
 
 1 City Dooument No. 59, 1849. 
 
Intramural Interments. 19 
 
 nances, and see what amendments were necessary. The 
 committee reported 11th of December, 1850. 1 The report 
 gives the number of burials in the city for 1849 (1,179) and 
 ten months of 1850 (689). The burials in the city proper 
 were mostly in family tombs, and the committee do not 
 think that the public good requires, or that public opinion 
 would sanction, the passage of an ordinance by which all in- 
 terments in family tombs would be prohibited. The statistics 
 of each year indicate that the number of interments in tombs 
 is annually decreasing ; a few years will show a more marked 
 decrease than during the past five years. It is a matter of 
 congratulation that a subject of this nature can be safely left 
 to the gradual, but sure and potent, influence of a correct 
 public sentiment ; and that, by the silent operation of agen- 
 cies which now engage public attention, many of the evils 
 attending the use of tombs in our city will be corrected 
 without the interference of stringent municipal regulations. 
 The enormous abuses which have been brought to the public 
 notice by the recent investigation of the subject of intramu- 
 ral burials in England, can never, it is thought, exist in this 
 country. The idea that the revolting and terrible scenes 
 which have been officially authenticated before the proper 
 authorities in England, in relation to the burial of the dead, 
 can ever occur in New England, is an insult alike to the nat- 
 ural feelings, and to the moral sense of our population. 
 There is no similarity in the condition of the two communi- 
 ties in relation to the subject of the burial of the dead, and 
 the popular sentiment and legislative action which have 
 recently taken place in England are not applicable to this 
 country, particularly to a city like Boston. 
 
 The committee advertised for a lot for a cemetery, but 
 failed to find one which was satisfactory. Referring to two 
 cemeteries which are about to be started at different points 
 from the city, the committee are of the opinion that the wants 
 of the citizens will be well served by their establishment, 
 and recommend that no further action be taken upon the 
 subject of purchasing for a cemetery to be controlled by the 
 city. The committee recommend that a lot of land, owned 
 by the city, situated on the borders of Dedham, be set apart 
 for a cemetery, to be used when the wants of the population 
 shall require additional burial facilities, and that an appro- 
 priation be made for ornamenting the grounds with forest 
 trees, in anticipation of its future use for that purpose. 
 This report was accepted. 
 
 In 1851 Mount Hope Cemetery was established by a pri- 
 
 1 City Document No. 39, 1850. 
 
20 City Document No. 96. 
 
 vate corporation, organized under the General Statutes, 
 Chap. 2$, and was consecrated June 24, 1852. 
 
 In his inaugural address, 1851, Mayor Bigelow expressed 
 his satisfaction that during the preceding year private 
 enterprise had, in a great measure, remedied the wants of 
 the community in regard to suitable burial accommodations, 
 by the establishment of extensive and well-located cemeteries 
 in Maiden and Dorchester. 1 
 
 In his inaugural address, in 1853, Mayor Seaver says: — 
 
 The practice of interments of the dead within the limits of the city 
 has been a subject of anxiety for several years past, and I think the 
 time has arrived when the question should be seriously considered as to 
 what measures are proper to be taken to prohibit it. Many intelligent 
 medical gentlemen are of opinion that the public health demands such pro- 
 hibition, and it has been hoped that the increasing disposition among the 
 citizens to provide burial lots in the vicinity of the city will, at no very 
 distant day, lead to the discontinuance of this practice. . . . The 
 subject has, I am aware, many difficulties, but I trust that some 
 measures may be adopted to remove the evil without too great an in- 
 fringement on private rights, or the wounding of private feeling. 
 
 On the 28th of February an order was passed directing 
 the Mayor to petition the Legislature for an act authorizing 
 the Mayor and Aldermen to prohibit any and all interments 
 within the limits of the city proper when they shall deem it 
 expedient to do so. 
 
 On the 14th of March an order was passed directing the 
 City Registrar to grant no license to bury or inter any dead 
 body in either of the following-named burial grounds, on. 
 and after the first day of the following July, viz. : the 
 Hull-street Burial-ground, the Granary Burial-ground, the 
 Chapel Burial-ground, and the tombs under Trinity Church, 
 Christ's Church, and Park-street Church. 
 
 Later in the year the wardens and vestry of Trinity and 
 Christ's Church petitioned to be exempted from the terms of 
 the order. Their petitions were referred to a committee who 
 reported that the order was wise and judicious and recom- 
 mended that the petitioners have leave to withdraw. 
 
 In 1854 the proprietors of St. Matthew's Church peti- 
 tioned that interments might be prohibited in the cemetery 
 of that church. The petition w r as referred to a committee, 
 who reported, July 24, " That their attention has been par- 
 ticularly called to the subject of intramural interments in 
 those places in the city whjch were excepted from the order 
 of the Board of 1853, and they are fully satisfied that intra- 
 mural interments should be abridged within this city as far 
 as possible, and that no measure appertaining to the public 
 
 1 Woodlawn and Mount Hope. 
 
Intramural Interments. 21 
 
 health is so important as this." They recommended the 
 passage of an order closing certain burial-grounds. The 
 report was recommitted. 
 
 The committee again reported, July 31, taking stronger 
 grounds than before against the practice of intramural inter- 
 ments ; they say : — 
 
 The committee have in no way changed their views in regard to 
 interments in the City of Boston. The territory is so limited, and the 
 increase of population such, as to render it morally certain that the accu- 
 mulation of decomposing human bodies at the ordinary rate of mortality, 
 if burials are continued, must prove essentially prejudicial to the living. 
 Aside from the combined testimony of all intelligent medical men, to 
 the evil consequences of stowing decaying animal remains under 
 churches and in tombs, in compact settlements, it is the common senti- 
 ment of this community, freely expressed, that burials should no longer 
 be tolerated in Boston. Where an opinion is advanced in opposition to 
 this philosophical conclusion, it is generally based on some reference to 
 a property interest. Throughout Great Britain measures have been 
 energetically adopted to prevent further interments in populous cities. 
 If, by the increase of a terrible nuisance, the people cannot occupy 
 residences contiguous to these vast receptacles of the dead, in sev- 
 eral sections of the city, on account of the offensive odors perpetually 
 wafted from them through the air, — a condition of things that may cer- 
 tainly be anticipated, — it is an act of humanity, as well as official obliga- 
 tion, to prevent a calamity which has had its origin from such a source 
 in other cities. A train of injurious effects arising from ftetid exhala- 
 tions and destructive gases emanating from putrid animal matter might 
 be collected in melancholy array, to sustain the position taken by the 
 committee ; but the fact that a simple declaration of the facts set forth 
 in the history of intramural burials are all that the circumstances of the 
 case require. Several rural cemeteries in the vicinity, distinguished 
 for beauty of location, are accessible at all seasons, and at moderate 
 prices. A large majority of citizens, bereft of their friends by death, 
 prefer these tastefully prepared grounds, where no encroachments inci- 
 dent to the march of business would hereafter disturb the sacred re- 
 mains of those deposited there. A knowledge, however, of the conse- 
 quences that may follow a continuance of the custom of intramural 
 burials in the midst of a thickly inhabited city must obviously, upon the 
 broad principle of self-preservation, be abandoned, and it will redound 
 to the official credit of the Board of Health to close every yard and 
 forbid the opening of another tomb in Boston, till their present con- 
 tents have entirely disappeared. 
 
 The report was laid on the table and the committee were 
 requested to consider the expediency of prohibiting the 
 interment of the dead in any burial-place within the limits of 
 the city. In response to this order the committee reported 
 recommending that the further consideration of the subject 
 be postponed until the city could provide a burial-place 
 beyond the city limits. 
 
 On the 9th of October an order was adopted directing the 
 City Registrar to issue no permits for burials in the burying- 
 ground on Dorchester, Sixth, and F streets, and under St. 
 Matthew's Church, and in Copp's Hill ground. 
 
22 City Document No. 9b\ 
 
 In 1855, Mayor Smith, in his inaugural address, recom- 
 mended that a tract of land situated in Read vi lie, belonging to 
 the city, should be set apart for a burial field and suitably 
 ornamented. He complained of the offensive condition of the 
 tombs in the Washington-street Burying-ground, and recom- 
 mended that they be sunk underground below the sidewalk 
 and an iron fence substituted for the stone wall in front. He 
 says : — 
 
 Burials within the city are not to be continued after April, without 
 special permission, under peculiar circumstances, and then but tempo- 
 rarily. Masses of decomposing animal remains in tombs and under 
 churches cannot remain there with impunity in the heart of a city. An 
 interdiction of intramural burials is the first sanitary law that should be 
 rigidly observed. 
 
 During the year active measures were undertaken to de- 
 crease the number of burials within the city limits and to 
 abate the nuisances which then existed from this cause. 
 
 An order was passed, April lti, authorizing the committee 
 to sink the tombs in the South Burying-ground below the 
 level of the ground, and to remove entirely the tombs owned 
 by the city. 
 
 On the 23d of April the Committee on Cemeteries were 
 authorized to offer each owner of a tomb within the limits 
 of the city a sub-soil lot in one of the suburban cemeteries, 
 on condition that the right to the tomb be forever relin- 
 quished to the city, to the end that the tomb may be forever 
 closed. 
 
 On the 10th of September the City Registrar was directed 
 not to issue permits to undertakers to deposit bodies in 
 tombs for purposes of speculation. 
 
 On the 24th of September the Mayor sent a communica- 
 tion to the Board of Aldermen, calling attention to an act 
 passed by the last Legislature in relation to burials, which, 
 among other things, authorized owners of tombs to appeal to 
 a jury from the order of the Board of Health, in regard to 
 closing a tomb. He expressed the opinion that the act was 
 liable to occasion great expense to the city by causing intermi- 
 nable lawsuits. It completely paralyzed the efforts of the 
 city to gradually abolish intramural interments and arrested 
 the wise and judicious measures which had been adopted to 
 that end. He recommended that the orders adopted March 
 14, 1^53, and October 9, 1854, be rescinded and burials 
 be permitted in any and all burial-grounds and tombs in 
 Boston. 
 
 The communication was referred to a committee, who 
 reported an order rescinding and declaring null and void the 
 orders referred to. 
 
Intramural Interments. 23 
 
 Mt. Hope Cemetery was conveyed to the city by deed 
 dated July 31, 1857, for the sum of $35,000. The Board of 
 Trustees was organized Feb. 19, 1858, and they submitted 
 their first report in in 1859. L In his annual report for 1859, 2 
 the City Physician, Dr. Henry G. Clark, congratulated the 
 City Council that the discussion of the subject of intramural 
 interments has been forever terminated by the establishment 
 of Mt. Hope Cemetery, — "thus removing the last obstruc- 
 tion to the discontinuance of a practice fraught with so much 
 discomfort and danger to the living." Four and three-fourths 
 acres have been set off for the benefit of the inhabitants of 
 the city, free of charge, and is known as the City Cemetery. 
 In 1868 the city purchased an additional lot of twenty acres 
 for $14,000. The cemetery contains, at the present time, an 
 area of about one hundred and five acres. 
 
 Undoubtedly the origin of extra-mural interment is to be 
 traced to the fact that the ancients early perceived that they 
 could not retain the remains of the dead in their habitations 
 with impunity to the living. Embalmment midit remove 
 the offensiveness, but the accumulation of remains in course 
 of time soon became too great to be retained within the 
 limits of the cities, and too burdensome a care for the sur- 
 vivors ; therefore a special place of deposit became necessary. 3 
 Cremation likewise demanded a place for the preservation of 
 the ashes, and involved much additional expense ; in fact, 
 special objections attended every method of disposing of the 
 dead ; but inhumation was probably shown, by experience, to 
 be least objectionable of all, when performed under proper 
 restrictions. Hence the most ancient practice of any, that 
 of putting the body away in a grave or tomb, to be resolved 
 into its original elements by the natural methods, again 
 prevailed. The evil effects of this method arise from its 
 abuse. 
 
 It would seem almost unnecessary, at the present advanced 
 stage of sanitary knowledge, to endeavor to prove that the 
 burial of the dead in the vicinity of habitations is injurious 
 to the health of the community ; yet it may not be deemed 
 superfluous to cite a few of the many instances on record, 
 to show the evil effects of the practice. 
 
 The decomposition of bodies gives rise to a very large 
 amount of carbonic acid. Ammonia and an offensive putrid 
 vapor are also given off. The air of most cemeteries is 
 
 i City Doc. No. 10, 1859. 
 
 2 City Doc. No. 9, 1859. 
 
 3 Dr. Latour, in " L'Union Medicale," remarks, that if the human race had, for the 
 last three thousand years, practised embalming, there would not have been to-day a 
 portion of the earth's surface which was not occupied by a mummy. 
 
24 City Document No. 96. 
 
 richer in carbonic acid (7 to 9 per thousand — Ramon de 
 Luna), and the organic matter is perceptibly larger when 
 tested by potassium permanganate. In vaults, the air con- 
 tains much carbonic acid, carbonate or sulphide of ammo- 
 nium, nitrogen, hydro-sulphuric acid, and organic matter. 
 Fang] and germs of infusoria abound. 1 
 
 The influence of these emanations of health is manifest in 
 proportion to the degree of concentration. It is evident that 
 in a very concentrated form they may cause asphyxia and 
 sudden and complete extinction of life. In less concentrated 
 form the result may be a depression of the vital powers, and 
 a disturbance of the healthy functions of the system. If these 
 effects are often repeated, and the putrefactive emanations 
 long applied, they may produce fevers, or impart to fevers 
 due to other causes a typhoid or low putrid character. Con- 
 tagious material may also be present in the effluvia from dead 
 bodies. The putrefactive exhalations may cause the most 
 developed form of typhus fever. 2 
 
 The disorders commonly complained of in the neighbor- 
 hood of burial-grounds are headaches, diarrhoea, and ulcer- 
 ated sore throats. According to a report of the French 
 Academy of Medicine, the putrid emanations of Pere-la- 
 Chaise, Montmartre, and Montparnasse, have caused frightful 
 diseases of the throat and lungs, to which numbers of both 
 sexes fall victims every year. M Thus a dreadful throat dis- 
 ease, which baffles the skill of our most experienced medical 
 men, is traced to the absorption of vitiated air into the wind- 
 pipe, and has been observed to rage with the greatest vio- 
 lence in those quarters situated nearest the cemeteries." 3 
 
 In 1764 Dr. Haguenot, a professor in the University of 
 Montpelier, had his attention called to the danger of intra- 
 mural interment by an incident which he relates, as fol- 
 lows : — 
 
 On the 17th of August, 1764, the body of a layman was conveyed to 
 the church of Notre Dame ; while lowering the corpse a man first went 
 down to support the coffin, and fell senseless; another followed to 
 assist him, and, though drawn out in time, was afflicted with a severe 
 illness; the third was drawn up immediately; a fourth dared the 
 danger, and died as soon as he had entered the vault ; the fifth came 
 out once to recover strength, and, returning the second time, staggered 
 from the ladder and fell dead. The bodies at last were drawn up with 
 hooks. In the neighborhood of the church, where the above calamity 
 took place, the small-pox broke out and raged with great violence. 
 Dr. Haguenot made many experiments, showing its influence on caus- 
 ing fatal or epidemic diseases. 4 
 
 ^r. Parkes' Practical Hygiene. Boston Pub. Lib., 3766.77. 
 
 2 Hygiene and Public Health, N.Y., 1879. 
 
 3 Eassie. 
 
 * Pascal is. 
 
Intramural Interments. 25 
 
 Dr. Maret, of Dijon, in a book published in 1773, relates 
 that "a catarrhal affection, or influenza, existed in Saulien, a 
 populous town of Burgundy. Two persons who died with 
 it were buried beside each other, in graves dug under the 
 pavement of the parish church, within an interval of twenty- 
 three days. The coffin of the first accidentally broke, and a 
 quantity of putrid fluid was effused, which in an instant filled 
 the whole building with a stench intolerable to the by- 
 standers, and out of one hundred and seventy persons one 
 hundred and forty were seized with putrid malignant fever, 
 which assumed the character of an epidemic, differing only 
 in intensity and fatality. 1 
 
 Dr. Navier, an eminent physician of Chalons, wrote in 
 1775 on the subject of inhumation. He states that the con- 
 fidence with which cemeteries were suffered to exist in large 
 and populous cities is founded on the erroneous belief that 
 bodies in the earth are very soon destroyed ; but this is far 
 from being the case. He ascertained that four years are not 
 a sufficient period for this purpose ; and relates that, having 
 examined three bodies disinterred, — the one after twenty, the 
 second after eleven, the third after seven years, — he found 
 the bones were still invested with some flesh and integu- 
 ments ; from which it is certain that, whatever receptacles of 
 the dead are opened, there is unavoidably a contamination 
 of the air, or some attacks of disease occasioned or in- 
 creased ; this he says he has often witnessed. He attributes 
 the abuses which existed in burying-grounds at that time to 
 the selfish and unreasonable custom of burying the dead 
 among the living, — a custom kept in operation by vanity, 
 avarice, and superstition. 1 
 
 During the general disinterment of the remains of the dead 
 in Paris, in 1785, a number of grave-diggers were killed on 
 the spot by the poisonous gases which arose from the graves, 
 although the exhumation was performed in the winter. The 
 neighborhood of the Cemetery of the Innocents had become 
 extremely unhealthy, and the neighbors had complained for 
 several years of the offensiVeness of the cemetery. Since the 
 removal of the remains the vicinity has become very healthy. 
 M. Fourcroy, who superintended the disinterment, wished to 
 make further researches into the nature of the gases evolved 
 from bodies ; but he could find no grave-digger who could be 
 induced, even by a promised reward, to assist in its collec- 
 tion, because it resulted in almost sudden death if inhaled in 
 a concentrated form near the body, and even at a distance, 
 when diluted and diffused through the atmosphere, produced 
 
 1 Pascalis. 
 
26 City Document No. 96. 
 
 depression of the nervous system, and an entire disorder of 
 its functions. 
 
 In 1814 a battalion of militia was stationed in a lot on 
 Broadway, the rear of which bounded on Potter's field, from 
 whence a most deadly effluvia arose. A number of the 
 soldiers were attacked with diarrhoea and fever. They were 
 removed at once ; one of the sick died, and the others rapidly 
 recovered. It was the opinion of Dr. Joseph Ackerly, that 
 Trinity church-yard was an active cause of the yellow fever 
 in New York in 1822, and that it aggravated the malignity 
 of the disease in its vicinity. The effluvia was so offensive 
 as to annoy passengers on the surrounding streets before the 
 yellow fever commenced. The virulence of the disease in 
 the immediate neighborhood of the cemetery called for active 
 measures on the part of the authorities, and the yard was 
 covered with quicklime, fifty-two casks being used. During 
 the operation the excessive stench caused several of the 
 laborers employed in the work to vomit. 1 
 
 In 1828, Professor Bianchi explained how the dire reap- 
 pearance of the plague in Modena was due to an excavation 
 made in the ground where, three hundred years previously, 
 the victims of the disease had been interred. 2 The outbreak 
 of the plague in Egypt, in 1823, was traced to the opening 
 of a disused burial-ground at Kelioub, fourteen miles from 
 Cairo. 2 In 1843, when the parish church of Menchinhamp- 
 ton was rebuilding, the soil of the burial-ground, or what 
 was superfluous, was disposed of for manure, and deposited 
 in many of the neighboring gardens. The result was that 
 the town was nearly decimated. 2 
 
 Tardieu states that in 1830, at the Marche des Innocents, 
 on the site of an old cemetery, temporary burials were made, 
 and a ditch was dug twelve feet by seven, and ten feet deep. 
 When the pavement was removed and about six inches of 
 sand beneath it, they came upon a black, greasy soil, filled 
 with bones and pieces of coffins, and exhaling such fetid 
 odors that one of the workmen was suddenly suffocated. At 
 Riom, in Auvergne, the earth of an ancient cemetery was dug 
 up to embellish the city. A little while after an epidemic 
 occurred, which carried off a great number of persons, and 
 was most fatal near the cemetery. The same thing caused 
 an epidemic, six years before, in a small town of the same 
 province, called Embert. 3 
 
 The epidemic of yellow fever in Charleston, S. C, in 1838- 
 39, was attributed to the decomposition of animal and vege- 
 
 1 Allen. 
 a Eassie. 
 3 A Treatise on Hygiene and Publio Health, N. Y., 1879. 
 
Intramural Interments. 27 
 
 table matter. A report upon the subject recommended bury- 
 ing the dead without the limits of the city. 1 
 
 Dr. Shank 2 relates the case of a man who died of cholera 
 in California, in 1850, and who was buried with his cloak 
 around him. The natives exhumed the body for the purpose 
 of getting the cloak, and six of them died of cholera. 
 
 During the prevalence of the cholera in Burlington, Iowa, 
 in July, 1850, a number of the dead were interred in the 
 city cemetery. No deaths occurred in the neighborhood of 
 the cemetery until about twenty had been buried there ; 
 after this, until the epidemic ceased, cases occurred, and 
 always in the direction from the cemetery in which the wind 
 blew. 3 
 
 During the epidemic of yellow fever at New Orleans, in 
 1853, it appears that in the fourth district the rate of mor- 
 tality was four hundred and fifty-two per thousand of the 
 population, being more than double that of any other district. 
 There are three extensive cemeteries in this district, in which 
 were buried during the preceding year nearly three thousand 
 bodies. The third ward of tKis district contained all the 
 cemeteries and most of the vacheires, and the proportion of 
 deaths in this ward was five hundred and eight per thousand. 
 The authorities were advised to close the cemeteries within 
 the city against future use. 4 
 
 The virulence of the cholera in London, in 1854, was en- 
 hanced by the excavations made for sewers in the site where, 
 in 1665, the victims of the plague were buried. 5 
 
 In 1855 the yellow fever carried off forty-five per cent, of 
 the population of Norfolk and Portsmouth, Va. In a paper 
 upon the subject, 6 Dr. Bryant attributes the virulence of the 
 disease to decomposing animal matter. He recommends the 
 disinterment of the dead, and their removal to a distance of 
 not less than eight miles from the city, together with the 
 total prohibition of intramural, or even suburban, cemeteries. 
 He believes that if this is not done it is unquestionable that 
 sporadic, and, at intervals, epidemic yellow fever will pre- 
 vail. 
 
 The investigation by the committee of Parliament, in 
 1842, elicited a vast amount of conclusive testimony as to 
 the evil effects of the exhalations from burying-grounds and 
 cemeteries upon the public health. It was shown that typhus 
 
 1 Rauoh. 
 
 2 Hay's Medical Journal. 
 , s Rauch. 
 
 4 Report of the Sanitary Commission on the Epidemio of Yellow Fever in 1853, 
 published by authority of the City Council of N.O., by Dr. E. H, Barton, 1854. 
 
 e Cooper " On the Cause of Some Epidemics," Glasoow, 1874. 
 
 s American Journal of Medioal Soiences, April, 1856. Boston Pub. Lib., 3736.1. 
 Vol. xxxi. 
 
28 City Document No. 96. 
 
 and other fevers were prevalent in the neighborhood of such 
 places. Persons employed upon the grounds testified to 
 suffering from inhaling the foetid odors which arose from the 
 graves and vaults. Houses in the vicinity of burying- 
 grounds were found to be infected and rendered unhealthy 
 by the poisonous £ases. In his testimony before the com- 
 mittee, Sir James Fellowes, M.D., says : — 
 
 It becomes a serious question with an increased and increasing popu- 
 lation upon what rational grounds such an objectionable feature can be 
 longer continued without danger to the public health. 
 
 Dr. Southwood Smith, of London, states that "the miasms 
 arising from church-yards are in general too much diluted 
 by the surrounding air to strike the neighboring inhabitants 
 with sudden and severe disease ; yet they may materially in- 
 jure the health, and the evidence appears to me to be decisive 
 that they often do so." 1 
 
 James Copeland, M.D., Censor of the Royal College of 
 Physicians, says : — 
 
 I believe that the health of large towns is influenced by four or five 
 particular circumstances : the first, and probably the most important, 
 is the burial of the dead in large towns. In considering the burials in 
 large towns, we have to consider not only the exhalations of the gases, 
 and the emanations of the dead into the air, but the effect it has upon 
 the sub-soil, or the water drank by the inhabitants. 
 
 Other eminent physicians testified to the same effect. 
 Mr. Chadwick sums up the result of his investigations, as 
 follows : — 
 
 There is no doubt that the emanations from human remains are of a 
 nature to produce fatal diseases, and to depress the general health of 
 all who are exposed to them, and that interments in the vaults of 
 churches, or in graveyards surrounded by inhabited houses, contribute 
 to the mass of atmospheric and other impurities by which the general 
 health and average duration of life of the inhabitants are diminished. 
 
 Numerous cases of infection, caused by the emanations 
 from burial-grounds, could be quoted from the medical 
 authorities ; but it is believed to be unnecessary. Enough 
 has been said to show that the removal of the dead is essential 
 to the safety of the living. 
 
 We have thus briefly endeavored to trace the history of 
 intramural interments, and to present some facts perti- 
 nent to the subject. It would seem that a natural feeling 
 of love, and the dread of parting from those dear to him, 
 has prompted man to keep the remains of his kindrejl 
 and friends near him ; while, on the other hand, the dictates 
 
 1 Chadwiok. 
 
Inteamural Interments. 29 
 
 of prudence warned him of the danger of so doing. In 
 fact, the history of the subject shows a continual struggle 
 between the atfectional nature and sound reason, — a conflict 
 between the head and the heart. The laws of nature cannot 
 be violated with impunity. Nature ordains that, when life is 
 extinct, the materials composing all living forms shall return 
 to their natural affinities, to be assimilated, and spring into 
 new life again. Any practice inconsistent with this order is 
 resented. It would seem as though, in order to secure this 
 result, the decomposing human body is made one of the most 
 horrible and offensive objects that can offend the senses of 
 the living. The only true way is to commit the body to the 
 earth, and permit the repulsive process of decomposition to go 
 on unseen. This can only be properly done in rural cemeter- 
 ies, where the space will permit of allowing the dead to rest 
 undisturbed until the body returns to dust. Within the city 
 limits land is too valuable to be devoted to such uses. The 
 wants of the living and the demands of business must 
 necessarily encroach upon the dead ; besides, there is some- 
 thing incongruous in associating the peaceful sleep of death 
 with the din and bustle of city life. In the words of Dr. 
 Jacob Bigelow : — 
 
 We regard the relics of our deceased friends and kindred for what 
 they have been, and not for what they are. We cannot keep in our 
 presence the degraded image of the original frame ; and, if some 
 memorial is necessary to soothe the unsatisfied want which we feel 
 when bereaved of their presence, it must be found in contemplating 
 the place in which we know their dust is hidden. The history of man- 
 kind, in all ages, shows that the human heart clings to the grave of its 
 disappointed wishes ; that it seeks consolation in rearing emblems and 
 monuments, and in collecting images of beauty over the disappearing 
 relics of humanity. This can be fitly done, not in the tumultuous ana 
 harassing din of cities, not in the gloomy and almost unapproachable 
 vaults of charnel-houses ; but amidst the quiet verdure of the field, 
 under the broad and cheerful light of heaven, where the harmonious 
 and ever-changing face of nature reminds us, by its resuscitating in- 
 fluences, that to die is but to live again. 1 
 
 The question of closing the Granary and King's Chapel 
 Burying-grounds is not surrounded with any of the dis- 
 agreeable circumstances which have attended like questions 
 in the past. It is not pretended that the present condition 
 of these grounds renders them dangerous to the public health. 
 Burials are infrequent, and, although it has been shown that, 
 under certain conditions, one decomposing body is capable 
 of doing much harm, but little danger need be apprehended 
 on this account. But, as long as the right of burial is main- 
 
 1 Modern Inquiries, Boston, 1867. Boston Pub. Lib., 4407.4. 
 
30 City Document No. 96. 
 
 tained the public safety is continually threatened. While 
 the contingency is extremely remote, there is a liability that 
 burials might become more frequent and the tombs be filled, 
 in which case no one would pretend but that the health of 
 the city would be endangered. In 1849 the Librarian of the 
 Massachusetts Historical Society was compelled to close the 
 windows overlooking King's Chapel Burying-ground, on 
 account of the disagreeable effluvia which arose from the 
 graves. 1 Since history repeats itself, it is well to guard 
 against such an occurrence in the future. Therefore, the 
 committee believe that, as a prudential measure, it is advis- 
 able to close the tombs at the present time. 
 
 The reports of the Board of Health have from time to 
 time called attention to the dilapidated and dangerous con- 
 dition of the tombs in our burying-grounds, and to the 
 liability of accidents from this cause. Owing to the diffi- 
 culty of tracing the ownership of such tombs, the expense of 
 making necessary repairs has been borne by the city, and 
 has amounted to no inconsiderable sum. It has been found 
 that the rights of ownership are not apt to be very strenuously 
 asserted when any expense is to be incurred. Aside from 
 the questions of danger and expense, the neglected condition 
 of these tombs is discreditable to the city and inconsistent 
 with the respect due the dead. 
 
 The opposition to closing the tombs arises chiefly from an 
 impression among the proprietors that it is but the first step 
 towards removing the remains and using the grounds for 
 other purposes. As far as the committee are concerned this 
 view of the case has not influenced their judgment in the 
 slightest degree. They believe that the historical value of 
 these grounds, as mementos of the past history of the city, 
 is too great to admit of their obliteration ; that while public 
 sentiment would approve of closing the tombs it would not 
 sanction the destruction of the grounds. Another objection 
 is found in the desire of some descendants of the original 
 proprietors to be buried with their ancestors. This, although 
 a purely sentimental objection, is entitled to respect, for, 
 with many, the wish to be laid after death with those who 
 were dear to them in life, is a feeling too deep and sacred to 
 be lightly treated. 
 
 But, in dealing with questions concerning the public health, 
 objections founded upon sentiment should have no weight. 
 Even hereditary rights must conform to the changes which 
 time brings about. The hereditary right to be buried in a 
 tomb does not include a right to poison the air and endanger 
 
 i Dealings with the Dead, vol. 1. L. M. Sargent, Boston, 1856. Boston Pub. Lib., 
 2406.12. 
 
Intramural Interments. 31 
 
 the health of the survivors, and, from a purely practical 
 stand-point, to insist upon any such right is to display a 
 selfish disregard of the public welfare. 
 
 Believing, therefore, that the practice of intramural inter- 
 ment is a relic of antiquity, which it is desirable, for many 
 reasons, to abolish, the committee respectfully recommend 
 the passage of the following order. 
 
 JOSEPH A. TUCKER, 
 JOSIAH 8. ROBINSON, 
 GttORGE T. PERKINS, 
 JAMES J. BARRY, 
 GEORGE H. WYMAN. 
 
 Ordered, That the Board of Health be directed to grant 
 no permit to bury or inter any dead body in either the 
 Granary Burying-ground, or the King's Chapel Burying- 
 ground, after January 1, 1880. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 ABSTRACT OF THE STATEMENTS BEFORE THE JOINT 
 SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON 
 THE SUBJECT OF CLOSING THE TOMBS IN THE 
 KING'S CHAPEL AND GRANARY BURYING-GROUNDS. 
 
 THE GRANARY BURYING-GROUND. 
 
 Tuesday, July 15, 1879 
 
 The committee met at three o'clock, P.M. 
 
 Present. — Alderman Tucker, Chairman ; Councilmen Perkins, 
 Barry. 
 
 W. H. Whitmore called the attention of the chairman to the 
 fact that the names on the list were those of the original grantees 
 of the tombs ; that the tombs have been transferred from time to 
 time, and by reading the names on the printed list the chairman 
 would be apt to mislead some of those present. 
 
 Geo. Wm. Phillips suggested that those present be heard ; and 
 if they could satisfy the committee that no tombs should be closed, 
 that will settle the decision of the whole. There are two hundred 
 and four tombs. Some one who is away might be willing to have 
 his tomb shut ; and another, for a satisfactory reason, would pre- 
 fer to let his remain open. He desired the inquiry to be a general 
 one. 
 
 The Chairman said the statute required that if any parties 
 present represent any particular tomb, that number should be 
 taken up ; and it is not necessary to go through the whole list. 
 
 James M. English, representing tomb No. 1, on behalf of 
 himself and Dr. Bethune, grandson of the gentleman who built the 
 tomb, objected to its being closed. They had taken care of it for a 
 number of years. They expect and desire to be buried there. 
 They inherited it from the builder. It has been abandoned by all 
 the other heirs ; and the present owners cannot conceive of any 
 public necessit^y for closing that tomb. There has not been an 
 interment in it for ten } T ears. 
 
 In reply to questions by Mr. Whitmore, Mr. English said he 
 could not state by what title the tomb is held at present. All the 
 other descendants had abandoned the tomb to Dr. Bethune and 
 himself. There are many other persons in the country belonging 
 to the family. He presumed the tomb was held by familv inheri- 
 tance. The city passed an ordinance some years ago, and at- 
 tempted to prevent interments there. He and his sister and Dr. 
 Bethune made an application to the court, in the nature of an 
 appeal, but before it came to trial the order was repealed. 
 
Appendix. 33 
 
 In reply to questions by Mr. Perkins, Mr. English said all but 
 two of the family had abandoned it ; that not long ago it had- been 
 cleaned oat, and everything put in order, for which the}- paid the 
 undertaker. Everything offensive was removed ; the skeletons 
 were put into boxes, and properly marked. Dr. Bethune and 
 himself had looked after it for the past twent}* years. Should 
 think there had been no interments there for about fourteen years. 
 John Bethune was put into the Faneuil tomb about fourteen years 
 ago. The tomb is at present in perfect order. It is an old family 
 tomb ; his ancestors had been buried there, and he should like to 
 lie with them unless it is injurious to the health of the city ; and it 
 it is the owners will submit. It is supposed by persons interested 
 in the tombs that the ultimate object is to use that ground for 
 other purposes ; and if the use of the tombs can be prevented all 
 their value is gone, and the cit\- may take it for any public use, 
 without being obliged to make compensation. He did not think 
 there is any foundation for that, because it struck him as scandal- 
 ous to suppose that the city would get possession of the ground 
 for nothing, to prevent its use b}' the present owners when that use 
 is not injurious to the public health. 
 
 George W. Phillips, representing tomb No. 60, appeared and 
 objected to its being closed. In it are buried his father, the first 
 ma3'or of Boston, his wife, and nearly all of his children, and the 
 wife and children of himself. In 1853 a movement similar to this 
 was made, and Dr. John C. Warren, a high authority on sanitary 
 matters, who lived on Park street, headed the remonstrances, and 
 scouted the idea that there was anything unhealthy in continuing 
 burials there, and who, rather than have the graveyard closed, 
 would be willing to have another in front of his house. Mr. 
 Phillips had looked through the records of the past few years, and 
 found that from 1873 to 1879 there have been only fourteen inter- 
 ments ; in 1873, seven ; in 1874, two ; in 1875, one ; in 1876, four ; 
 in 1877, four; and in 1878, two. If this were a nuisance the 
 Tremont House, with its broadside toward that graveyard^ would 
 have been heard from a hundred times ; the residents of Park 
 street would have been here. He had lived near the Athenaeum 
 many years, and never heard a word against the burial-ground as 
 being mischievous. It does not average three burials a year. In 
 the early histor}' of the town these tombs were laid out, and by 
 actual grant the owners had given them an easement, and the 
 right to bury in that }\ard. The ground is used for the purposes for 
 which it was granted. The tombs are worth from fifty to two hundred 
 dollars each, and the cit} T will hear from it if the closing is finally 
 decreed. Eveiy man has an attachment for the burial-place of his 
 kindred. He desired to be buried where his kindred were laid. 
 The new blood that comes down to Boston from New Hampshire 
 and Vermont brings many people who do not appreciate this 
 feeling. Here are a few tombs opened twice a } r ear to receive the 
 remains of those on that long list who ask to be buried there. 
 Ten to fifteen years, at the farthest, will close the list. What he 
 said is not a mere sentiment, but a regard for that feeling which 
 is imbedded in every man's heart, that the burial-place of his 
 
34 City Document No. 96 
 
 ancestiy shall be respected. He asked the New Hampshire and 
 Maine men to decide upon this thing just as the}* would upon the 
 breaking up of their own burial-places. He did not believe they 
 are prejudicial to public health. If so, why has it not been heard 
 from before? If the}* are a nuisance the Board of Health is bound 
 to come forward and show it before the hearing was opened. The 
 fact that in this dense population no complaint has been heard for 
 the Inst twenty years calls for some justification more than has 
 been hinted at. St. Paul's Church is opened a hundred times to 
 the Granary ground once ; and yet nobody has ever suggested that 
 that was an unhealthy use of the ground. Tomb No. 60 has been 
 opened thirteen times in sixty -four years, and may be opened three 
 or four times more. Unless tlve committee see reasons other than 
 those named they should allow it to be used a few years longer. 
 
 Mr. AVhitmore called attention to the legislation expressly pro- 
 hibiting burials under St. Paul's Church ; and more than that all the 
 remains are to be removed, which is more than has been suggested 
 in regard to the Granary Burial-ground. He desired to know of 
 Mr. Phillips, whether the large number of occupants who paid 
 nothing for the tombs had any claim for damages in case they are 
 closed. He asked this, because he knew that a great many of the 
 tombs are not in the possession of the descendants of the persons 
 who received the grants, and that no regard was paid to the 
 feelings of the original owners. At the time of the Revolution a 
 number of the loyalist families owning the tombs in various city 
 grounds were exactly in the position of Mr. Phillips at present ; 
 the tombs were not only confiscated, but the contents were thrown 
 out, and other persons received the tomb as a free gift. Governor 
 Hutchinson's tomb was despoiled, and was occupied by others, — a 
 well-known historical fact. There are others who desire to be 
 buried in the cit}' with their relatives, and why is there any par- 
 ticular reason why the owners of tombs are to have their feelings 
 in that respect, if contrary to the public interests, any more con- 
 sidered than those who are buried in graves? Yet in 1796 the 
 town forbade further interments in the graves, and none have taken 
 place in the city since. It is a great hardship to prevent a person 
 from depositing his remains with those of his relatives ; but it is 
 no greater to those who own tombs than to those who expect to be 
 buried in graves. Since the laying out of Mt. Auburn many per- 
 sons preferred having the remains of their friends transferred from 
 the city yards to the new tombs and graves in Mt. Auburn. But 
 the question he desired Mr. Phillips to explain is in regard to the 
 pecuniary interest of those who claim rights in the tombs. 
 
 Mr. Phillips. It is a mere bagatelle. I shall not claim any 
 damages. But can anything be clearer that a man who has a 
 right of burial in a certain spot has a pecuniary interest? Mr. 
 Whitmore has been in Judge Paine's office long enough to know 
 that a man who squats on a place has a title to his position. The 
 town having given them the right, for which they paid, how 
 is it possible to say it is not property, for which the constitution 
 gives an indemnity ? He did not understand the Hutchinson case, 
 as presented by Mr. Whitmore, to be correct. The Board of 
 
Appendix. 35 
 
 Health cannot sa}' that opening the ground four times a year can 
 injure the public health, and it is absurd nonsense to talk about it. 
 Think of the cesspools and open vaults which have had no pro- 
 tection for years ; and here they come squalling about three inter- 
 ments a year 
 
 Frank W. Bigelow, representing tomb No. 70, objected to 
 the closing of the tomb. Hon. Thomas Hubbard was the original 
 owner, and it was inherited from him. There have been no inter- 
 ments since 1874; it is in thorough repair, and not a nuisance. 
 He had it repaired himself, and stopped up with suitable flag-stones ; 
 it is covered up to a depth of three feet. He did not think his fam- 
 ily would use it, but they are certainly not willing that the rights 
 granted by the town of Boston should be taken away. 
 
 Mrs. Caroline M. Shute, representing tomb No. 39, the Capt. 
 Thomas Adams tomb, objected to its being closed. It descended 
 to her from her father, who inherited it from his grandfather, 
 Thomas Adams. She has a father, mother, brothers, and sisters, 
 and four children buried there. She has three more children, and 
 hopes herself to be buried there. From child hood, she has been 
 taught that that is her future home, and would feel very bad indeed 
 to know that she is to be deprived of being laid there to rest 
 with her relatives. Twenty }-ears ago it was opened for her 
 father, and on the 20th of last February for her child, — the 
 onlv interments in twenty years. There are only four more to 
 go into that tomb. She had a letter from Col. Staples, who has a 
 right in the tomb, and decidedly objects to its being closed. She 
 had no other home to go to when she dies. It may be years, and 
 it may be a very little while ; but she hoped to go where her father, 
 mother, and children are laid. It has always been kept in repair; 
 there is nothing about it which can be considered a nuisance. 
 Nobod}- can bear the idea of being separated from relatives ; we 
 all want to go to one place ; those who have nice places outside 
 can go there. She had no home to go to except this. She hoped 
 the committee would think how hard it will be to be separated 
 from a father and mother in that home. Her father taught her, 
 from a little bit of a girl, that she was to go there when she died. 
 The idea that it is going to be closed up, and that right taken 
 away from her, had grown upon her so that she could hardlj r sleep. 
 She wanted to be put there, and have the rest of her children put 
 there. 
 
 L. H. Bean, representing tomb No. 3, objected. It is one of 
 the original tombs granted, by the town of Boston, to his ances- 
 tors and others, provided they built the tombs satisfactory to the 
 town and maintained them for purposes of burial, and so long as 
 they maintained them in good order the} T were to have the use of 
 them. It descended to him from the original owner, in 1721. He 
 had had the custod}' of the tomb for fort3'-five years, — had kept 
 it in repair. It had been cleaned and whitewashed, and there is 
 nothing about it detrimental to the public health. It is many 
 years since it was last opened. But three persons will probably 
 request to be interred there, and it ma} T be that circumstances will 
 be such that they will not. His immediate family have been 
 
36 City Document No. 96. 
 
 removed to Forest Hills, but this is kept as the family tomb ; he 
 protested against his rights being taken away. The tomb is 
 directl} T in the rear of the house formerly occupied b}- Hon. Abbott 
 Lawrence. A large window opens directly upon the grounds. 
 He had never heard an}- complaint from the famity, or from the 
 Union Club, as to its being a nuisance. When the hearing took 
 place, some years ago, on the intention of the city to close the 
 tombs, Dr. Warren, residing on Park street, Dr. Gardner, and all 
 the gentlemen on that street, joined in testifying that the}- never 
 considered it a nuisance. They did complain that one or two of 
 the tombs had gone into the hands of speculators, and were 
 opened oftener than the}' ought to be. Where they are used for 
 family purposes he could not see any objection. The last inter- 
 ment there was ten 3'ears ago, and the one previous to that was 
 six years before. All his ancestors, from the time of the Revolu- 
 tion, with the< exception of his own family, are buried there. He 
 protested against any infringement of his right to use it for family 
 purposes. He did not intend to be buried there himself, nor to 
 have his children buried there. 
 
 Mr. Bean also spoke in regard to the Thomas W. Sumner tomb, 
 No. 99. The only three persons who will ever be placed in it are 
 very aged, — one over ninety-five, and another about seventy-eight ; 
 they reside in New Bedford. The tomb was opened a number of 
 years ago to bury an arm}- officer ; the last interment was three 
 years ago, when it was covered with flag-stones and sealed with 
 cement. It is nearly opposite the Tremont House, well up in the 
 yard, and it would be impossible for any effluvia to escape from it ; 
 besides, it would be veiy difficult to get it open. 
 
 Robert Treat Paine, Sr., representing tomb No. 88, objected 
 to its being closed. He is the grandson of the man to whom it was 
 granted, — to him and his heirs forever. He inherited it from 
 his grandfather who died in 1814. He was at his house on the pre- 
 vious thanksgiving day ; all the family were there, and of all those 
 present none are now living but himself, and he had been hoping 
 to be buried there with them. Mr. Paine also represented No. 
 148, belonging to the father of his wife, who opposes any change. 
 The stone is covered four feet deep, and he could not believe there, 
 are an)' injurious exhalations from it. 
 
 Albert Parker Simpson objected to the closing of No. 1 1 7, en- 
 dorsing what had been said. It had belonged in the family ever 
 since the original grant, and had always been intended to be used 
 b}' those now living. It is in the rear of the yard, about in the 
 middle. One interment was made the first part of this year. Per- 
 haps there are three or four more to be buried there. In the last 
 fifteen years there have been but five burials. He and all the par- 
 ties likely to be buried there are residents of Boston. Should 
 think there were perhaps a dozen or fifteen bodies in the tomb. 
 
 Ebenezer Gay appeared for tomb No. 124, built in 1772 b)' his 
 grandfather. The last burial was two or three years ago. Buri- 
 als have occurred there in the last sixty }'ears, and some bodies 
 have been recently removed to Forest Hills. His grandfather was 
 buried in 1809. He endorsed what Mr. Phillips and Mr. English 
 
Appendix. 37 
 
 had said as general considerations. He had no other burying-place 
 for himself and family. If the scope of this inquiry is limited to 
 the sanitary use of the grounds, he hoped the committee would 
 give time for the remonstrants to present reasons and opinions of 
 judges and experts. He thought it could be shown that as a sani- 
 tary measure the tombs need not be closed. 
 
 Mrs. Emily A. Bell, representing tomb No. 164, said it is in 
 good condition and has always been attended to. It is in the 
 arena back of the monument. It was opened about two years ago, 
 and there are about half a dozen more who claim a privilege there. 
 There are only a few bodies there belonging to her family. There 
 are six more to use it. 
 
 John- B. Osborn, representing tomb No. 91, said he adopted 
 the sentiments of the gentlemen who had spoken, and protested 
 against closing the tomb. 
 
 Henry F. Jenks, representing tomb No. 177, said it was put 
 down in the name of Fitch & Freeman ; but he thought the Free- 
 mans had sold their part to his grandfather. Probably only one 
 person more in the family will be buried there. There has been 
 no burial for fourteen or fifteen years. He objected to the tomb 
 being closed. He would be likely to remove the bodies if the tomb 
 was closed. If any tombs are left open he wanted the same privi- 
 lege. 
 
 Andrew Geer appeared for tomb No. 72, in the name of John 
 Endicott. His family had had a right of burial there as far back as 
 1830 down to within twelve years. His sister and himself are the 
 only two remaining of the family. It has not been opened for 
 twelve years ; it cannot be much of a nuisance, and he protested 
 against having it closed. His father, mother, brothers, and sisters 
 are buried there, and perhaps he might want to go in there some 
 da}' himself. The last interment was made twelve years ago. In 
 I860 his mother was buried there ; in 1856 or '57 his sister, and in 
 1840 his father. He didn't think it had been opened for any other 
 parties except his family for forty years. 
 
 Miss Mary C. Oliver, for tomb No. 26, objected to its being 
 closed. Her parents and brother are buried there, and she wanted 
 the same right if she chose to exercise it. 
 
 The committee received a request from Messrs. Phillips, English, 
 and others representing various tombs, for a further hearing, that 
 they ma}' offer evidence on the general question. 
 
 Adjourned to Thursday, July 31, at two o'clock, P.M. 
 
 THE SECOND HEARING. 
 
 Thursday, July 31," 1879. 
 
 The committee met at two, P.M. 
 
 Present. — Alderman Tucker, Chairman ; Councilmen Perkins, 
 Wyman, and Barry. 
 
 James H. Munroe, representing tomb No. 113, said there had 
 been only two interments in it for the last fifteen years. Tha 
 
38 City Document No. 96. 
 
 name Hayden is down for this number ; but he did not know what 
 interest that man has. The interment previous to the one men- 
 tioned was seven years before, and the previous one was twenty 
 years earlier. He examined the tomb thoroughly in 1871 ; it 
 was as perfect as when built in 1810. There is nothing detri- 
 mental to health in it. He strongly opposed its being closed, and 
 endorsed the sentiments of Mr. Phillips and the other remon- 
 strants at the last meeting. He objected on the ground that these 
 tombs and monuments should be preserved. If another satisfac- 
 tory place was given him he might not object individually, but 
 could not speak for the other owners who have other places of 
 interment. 
 
 Thomas C. Amory objected to closing tomb No. 78. He had 
 ancestors buried in it, where they have rested quietly for a hun- 
 dred years, and he hoped would be permitted to rest many hun- 
 dred years longer. Though we have the glorious Common and 
 this buiying-ground, we have not too many places for breathing 
 and elbow-room in the heart of the city. We have half a million 
 people, more or less ; are bound to have a million and a half in the 
 future, and it is very desirable to keep as much open land in the 
 centre of the city as possible. On that ground, if no other, he 
 trusted there will be no disposition to disturb the tombs. One of 
 the tombs he was interested in, where his ancestor lies, was 
 given by the city for public services during the Revolution, after he 
 came to take up his abode in Boston. From fifty to sixty of his 
 ancestors are buried there, and within ten years the speaker had 
 followed a hearse to that tomb with one of his relatives to be 
 buried. As a general rule the tombs are ver}' rarely used except 
 for guarding the ashes of the dead, and in that burying-ground are 
 deposited the remains of a very large number of the historical per- 
 sonages in whom we take most pride, whose memories we are 
 bound to cherish,' and on whose tombstones should have been in- 
 scribed what Shakespeare put upon his own, " Accursed be he who 
 removes these bones." It would be a most sacrilegious act and en- 
 tail endless disgrace upon Boston if they and their descendants 
 should be removed for the sake of any private, immediate, or fu- 
 ture profit, or from a disposition to violate the tombs. The whole 
 community- shuddered when it was proposed to place a court-house 
 there, and it was contrary to the wishes and taste of the public to 
 put it to any such purpose. He had a burial-place at St. Paul's, 
 and trusted there would be some hesitation about carrying out the 
 disposition to close up the tombs there. If a time should ever 
 come when a public opinion would be generated so as not only to 
 close up these tombs, but appropriate them under the right of emi- 
 nent domain for any sanitary purpose, or public use, when the 
 time came for making compensation, the present actual use would 
 be an important element in the amount to be paid by the city for 
 what was taken. It will be an injury in advance and an indirect 
 violation of the constitutional safeguard, that no man's property 
 should be taken without compensation, by lessening the value of 
 the present use of the tomb. If you take away the present use 
 you ought to pay for the privilege. If you close it up by the right 
 
Appendix. 39 
 
 of eminent domain, when the whole privilege is taken, and the 
 Granary Burial-ground applied for some other purpose, then the 
 whole expense of placing it in some position, — into a place 
 equally agreeable, — the city would omit the element of present 
 use in computing the value. He objected to separating the present 
 use from the property in the tomfc itself. It would be difficult for 
 the city to settle upon the amount of damages. Finding a resting- 
 place somewhere else would be perhaps a very serious matter. 
 Many people of verj' limited means have struggled along until 
 they are threescore 3-ears and ten, who are looking forward with 
 great satisfaction to their final rest in those tombs with those they 
 love. If this is taken away the families are so scattered there 
 would be much trouble to find another place of interment. Burial- 
 grounds have been in existence in London and Rome some two 
 thousand years, and there has always been a disposition every- 
 where to respect the sanctities of the tomb. 
 
 Mr. George W. Phillips obtained permission to introduce a 
 few witnesses upon the general question of the effect of the tombs 
 upon public health. 
 
 H. C. Brooks, residing at the Tremont House for sixteen to eigh- 
 teen years, occupying a room on the south side next the buiying- 
 ground, had never heard any complaint of injurious effect from burials 
 on that ground, and had never perceived any bad effect himself. 
 
 Mr. Phillips read a letter from Hon. Alpheus Hardy, trustee 
 of and boarder at the Tremont House, and familiar with it for 
 twenty-five years, stating that he never had had a complaint of the 
 burial-ground or heard of one from any source. If there had been 
 cause for complaint he should have known of it. 
 
 Lewis P. Jones, undertaker, and sexton of St. Paul's Church, 
 had never heard any complaint from burials in the cit} r grounds 
 during thirtj*-five years. Dr. Warren, who lived on Park street, 
 told him he considered the light and air from the burial-ground 
 one of the greatest things he could have for the estate. Most of 
 the tombs used for the last thirty years are covered by stones, the 
 planks having been taken away. He lived thirty -five years in the 
 rear of St. Paul's Church ; never saw a sick da}- since he has been 
 in Boston. His wife had not been well for some years ; but her 
 famil} r , who never lived there, were much the same as she was. 
 He was in the St. Paul's Church tombs about a third of the time 
 for thirty years, and never experienced any bad effect from efflu- 
 via. Mr. Jones told one or two anecdotes to show the supersti- 
 tious fear people have of dead bodies. The Granary Burying- 
 ground is in good condition ; once in a while a place is found 
 where the boards are rotten, and in many cases the boards are re- 
 placed with stones. He was in the ground } r esterday, and saw no 
 tombs except what were in perfect condition. He had two children, 
 and they had alwa} T s been in good health. 
 
 Richard Sullivan, owner of one-half of tomb 146, had a great 
 many friends buried there, and objected to the right of burial being 
 taken away. It was last opened about ten years ago ; was in good 
 condition then : had heard no complaint. He would prefer a burial- 
 place there to one at Mt. Auburn. 
 
40 City Document No. 9G. 
 
 Henry G. Denny, representing one-half of tomb No. 111, bnilt 
 by Obadiah Wright, appeared for the present owner, Miss Caroline 
 Wright, who objected to the tomb being closed. The last inter- 
 ment was in 1844. Miss Wright would consider it a case of 
 peculiar hardship if prevented from having her remains deposited 
 in the tomb which her father provided two-thirds of a century ago, 
 and which she has looked forward to occupying for the last thirty 
 years. Apart from the considerations of sentiment and associa- 
 tion in her case it will be a peculiar hardship to be deprived of the 
 right of burial there. She has no means of providing a burial- 
 place for herself and the other members of the family, and she has 
 looked to this as her last resting-place for a long time ; she is 
 decidedly opposed to being deprived of her rights in the tomb. 
 About a dozen years ago, Mr. Denny lived for a year on Park 
 street, and was a frequent visitor at the same house for about 
 ten years ; he occupied a room opening upon the burial-ground ; 
 never heard anything objectionable or any complaint from that 
 house or the neighboring house in regard to the ground, which was 
 regarded as an advantage to the estates, as being ornamental, and 
 giving additional value to them on account of the rear outlook. 
 He never found anything objectionable. 
 
 Elliot Pette represented the Faneuil tomb, No. 138. When it 
 was proposed to close the tomb, in 1854, his family secured a lot at 
 Mt. Auburn, and one member was buried there. When the restric- 
 tion was removed the remains of his relatives were brought into 
 Boston, and they sold their lot in Mt. Auburn. His family and the 
 Jones family decidedly object to closing the tomb. The last inter- 
 ment was in 1875. The tomb is in good condition. It is the 
 tomb of Peter Faneuil, has his coat of arms upon it, and, apart 
 from personal objections, it is historical ground and should not be 
 destroyed. I£ the city should agree to provide a suitable place he 
 would still object to this tomb being closed. He thought there 
 were four of each family likely to be buried there. 
 
 James L. Wilson, a part owner of tomb No. 174, known as the 
 Gray and Wilson tomb, said it came into the hands of Robert Gray 
 fifty years ago, and into the hands of Mrs. Wilson, his wife, who is 
 present. Her great-grandfather, all her ancestors, and her children, 
 are buried there. She is naturally very sensitive against this 
 movement to deprive her of her rights. The last burial was that 
 of her father about fourteen years ago. Her father had cared for 
 it forty years before his decease at eightj'-one years of age, since 
 which time the speaker had had the care of it. It is in good re- 
 pair and always has been. He had lived within a short distance 
 of it in Montgomery place, and never heard any complaints 
 against it. He never heard of anybody dying at the Tremont 
 House except from extreme old age. The same may be said of 
 other places in the vicinity. It is one of the healthiest neighbor- 
 hoods in the city. 
 
 W. R. Gray, representing tomb No. 162, asked if there would 
 be an} T objection to allowing the bodies to be removed if the tombs 
 are closed ; to which the chairman replied that he was under the 
 impression there never had been any objections to removing the 
 
Appendix. 41 
 
 remains from an}' of the tombs. If the tombs are merely to be 
 closed and the grounds remain open, with rights of the owners 
 protected, Mr. Gray said he should not object ; otherwise he would. 
 
 Charles Hubbart objected to closing tomb No. 158, on the 
 ground that he had no where else to bury the dead. The tomb is 
 in good condition. It was last opened about thirty -two years ago. 
 He was in the tomb some time last spring. There was something 
 said about taking the burial-ground for public purposes, and he 
 thought he would not do any more repairs until he found out what 
 was going to be the result. If the majority of the owners decided 
 to give the city that piece of ground for speculation, he would de- 
 cide with them. Most of the heirs of this tomb, about twenty in 
 his family, who will take care of it, are all young people. He did 
 not propose to give the City of Boston an inch of ground. The 
 city cannot make a nuisance of it. The whole thing could be 
 taken care of for a little money if the owners were a mind to put 
 their heads together. He had never lost any of his family and 
 hoped he never should. At the same time the right in the tomb 
 comes hand}-, and will save a few dollars, for it costs a good deal 
 to bury a body nowadays. It is considerable honor to own a 
 burial-place in the Granary burial-ground. It is an historical place, 
 and ought to be fenced up more than it is now. If it had a higher 
 fence it would keep the corporations and peanut-stands away from 
 it. ' He went all over the ground last spring and found only one 
 place where the rats were getting in at the top of the tomb. 
 
 Frank W. Bigelow said that within thirty years there had been 
 nearly a hundred dollars spent on the two tombs he represented, 
 he having expended sixty odd dollars on the one in the Chapel- 
 ground. He objected to closing the tomb even if another place 
 was provided. 
 
 Mr. Phillips addressed the committee on the general question 
 of the expediency of closing the tombs. He quoted the statute 
 authorizing the proceedings, and admitted that if the tombs can 
 be shown to be a nuisance, no matter whose ancestors are buried 
 there, they should be closed. The Board of Health have simply 
 reported that the public health requires that future interments in 
 each and all the tombs of the Granary Burying-ground should be 
 prohibited. They presented this without a single reason except 
 their own statement. What right have they to say that all the 
 tombs, from 1 to 204, need to have this prohibition put upon them? 
 How can the committee say that tomb No. 1 comes within that 
 category ? It contains a box and some dry skeletons. Are they 
 going to accept the sweeping charge, when the evidence is plain 
 that it may as well never have been occupied? In his own case 
 the tomb has not been opened for sixteen years, and in sixty years 
 but about twelve times. It is covered with flagging, and about 
 three feet of loam. Nothing is more impervious to noxious 
 gases than loam, and yet the Board of Health say it is noxious. 
 Mr. Phillips quoted from the reports of the Board of Health from 
 1875 to 1878, to show that, with the exception of once, they have 
 never used the word " sanitary" in regard to closing these tombs, 
 having all the while urged it upon the ground that it is expensive, 
 
42 City Document No. 96. 
 
 having put it in black and white that the land is worth over a 
 million dollars, and could be used as a court-house. It would 
 seem that when they found they could not get rid of it in that 
 way, they make this charge. Upon the case presented, there is no 
 evidence by which the committee can report to the government 
 that the tombs are unfit for future interment. Mr. Phillips stated 
 that he appeared also for tomb No. 60, No. 157, No. 96, and No. 
 107^. The statute requires the committee to report that the 
 specific numbers referred to are nuisances, and he claimed there 
 was nothing in the evidence authorizing them to make such a 
 report. 
 
 George Allen, owner of tomb No. 12, said it had not been 
 opened for twenty years, no more interments are intended to be 
 made there, and while it is not his intention to open it again, he 
 did not wish to dispose of it. He had no objection to having it 
 permanently sealed. 
 
 Wilson J. Welch, representing tomb No. 144, remonstrated 
 against its being closed unless it is proved to be unhealthy to the 
 cit} r ; or if the cit}' will provide such a place as they would choose, 
 the owners would not object. He would prefer that the city would 
 give them the mone}' for the value of the tomb, and let them go 
 to Forest Hills or somewhere else, and provide a place for them- 
 selves. The tomb was in perfect order in 1839, and has never 
 been opened since. 
 
 The chairman filed the following letter with the papers in the 
 case : — 
 
 Machias, Washington County, Maine, 
 
 July 28, 1879. 
 
 Messrs. Tucker, Barry, and Perkins, Joint Special Committee of the City 
 Council on the Granary Burying- ground : — 
 
 Gents, — I see by the proceeding before you on the 15th, that Mrs. Caroline 
 M. Shute represented tomb No. 39, owned by Capt. Thomas Adams. Her 
 father was the son of Jacob Rust, who married Mary Adams, daughter of 
 Capt. Thomas Adams. My father, Capt. Edward Staples, married Diana 
 Adams, also a daughter of Capt. Thomas Adams. The Rust family and the 
 Staples family being the only owners of the Capt. Thomas Adams tomb, No. 
 39, Granary Burying-ground, on Tremont street, in the City of Boston. Upon 
 the recommendation of the Board of Health, you propose to prohibit any 
 further interments in said Granary Burying-ground. I protest against the 
 closing of the tomb which I represent, on the ground that it is a nuisance. This 
 tomb has been opened only four times in the last seventy years (70) ; in 1809, 
 1819, 1822, and 1841, for my father, mother, and two brothers. I have a 
 brother buried in Philadelphia, and two sisters in Belvidere, Illinois. I am 
 the only one of my fathers family living, and I have passed my seventy-fifth 
 year (75). I was born in the City of Boston; my father lived at 83 Prince 
 street, and done business on Long Wharf, and I desire to be buried in the 
 city where I was born. I have one daughter who desires to be buried in the 
 tomb in Boston, and the remains of my wife who died since I lived there, I in- 
 tend to remove to Boston, tomb No. 39, Granary Burying-ground. I had 
 three daughters, one married here, and her husband and children are buried 
 here, and she probably will be. One of my daughters married Otis N. Jones, 
 of Boston, son of Eliphalet Jones ; died, and was buried at Mt. Auburn. 
 
 I protest against the closing the Granary Burying-ground against any further 
 interments. I don't believe the Board of Health or the authorities of the City 
 of Boston, or State of Massachusetts, have the right to deprive me of my 
 
Appendix. 43 
 
 property and resting-place, without making a sufficient compensation for the 
 same. I am desirous the burial-place of my father, mother, brothers, uncles, 
 and aunts, grandfather and grandmother, should be respected. 
 I am with respect, your obedient servant, 
 
 THOMAS ADAMS STAPLES. 
 
 This closed the public hearing upon the closing of the tombs in 
 the Granar} T Burying-ground. 
 
 The chairman called upon the members of the Board of Health, 
 and Mr. Keith said the closing of the tombs was no new thing, 
 having been mentioned in the reports ever}* year since the Board 
 had been in existence, and mention had also been made of burial- 
 grounds at other places in the heart of the city proper. Some 
 of the tombs in this Granary Burying-ground are in such a di- 
 lapidated condition that men emplo} T ecl to cut the grass around 
 them have in some instances fallen into them and disappeared 
 out of sight. In two instances the men were so frightened that 
 they refused to go back there to work. Most of the tombs have 
 been opened by the frost and rain, and are in such an exposed con- 
 dition that if a body were deposited there the gases would come 
 out without any let or hindrance. Eveiy one knows the difficulty of 
 confining such gases. Ever since the organization of the Board 
 of Health, whether under the city or town government, it has called 
 the attention of the public to the closing of those burial-grounds 
 in the heart of the city. In 1795 the selectmen voted that no 
 graves or new tombs shall be opened or built in either the Common 
 or Chapel Burying-grounds after the 1st day of May next then 
 ensuing. No new graves have been opened since that time. The 
 City of Boston then only ha.d a population of eighteen thousand. 
 He inferred that the selectmen would have closed the tombs had 
 the}* the power to do it. Sanitarians agree that burials in tombs 
 are infinitely more unhealthy than in the ground, where the body is 
 covered with earth which will absorb the gases. There has not 
 been sufficient authority in the law to prevent burials in the tombs 
 until the Legislature of 1877 amended the law in a way that it 
 could be acted upon, sa} r ing the City Council should have power 
 to do so after the Board of Health recommend that future inter- 
 ments should cease. As to the condition of the tombs, he knew 
 of one near the Tremont House where the coffins are wedged in 
 edgeways and are sticking up upon the steps of the tomb. The 
 frost often causes them to give way before the authorities are 
 aware of it, and, as was the case at the buiying-ground on Eustis 
 street, the first they knew the dogs and cats were bringing out the 
 bones and playing with them upon the ground. All the tombs are 
 in such an open, cracked condition that the gases will escape very 
 easily. The law does not contemplate that the Board shall prove 
 the tombs are actually in a state of nuisance. The law is to pre- 
 vent the arising of a nuisance. The Board recommend that future 
 interments shall cease because the condition of the tombs is such 
 that a nuisance must arise. If a rat or mouse dies within the walls 
 of a house the stench becomes so great you cannot live there. 
 The human body is no sweeter than that of a rat. It is all flesh. 
 
44 City Document No. 96. 
 
 In the process of decay the human body is no sweeter than that of 
 any animal upon the earth's surface. Just so much more offen- 
 sive will a human body be as it is larger, and the gases will exhale 
 in the same proportion. The stench from that burial-ground has 
 been such that members of the Board of Health, whose office has 
 been next to the ground, have been sick ever since its organization. 
 Mr. Whiting, Mr. Crowell, Mr. Boardman, the clerk of the Board, 
 and the clerk in the rear office, were all made sick by it. I have 
 gone to the office feeling perfectly well, and in ten minutes my 
 head would turn round so that I would have to go back into the 
 open air. This is caused by the gases from that burial-ground. Mr. 
 J. P. Bradlee, for several 3-ears President of the Board of Directors 
 for Public Institutions, occupied the room we did, and was made 
 sick in the same way, and he told the Board he could not stand 
 it. The janitors sa} T that when the}' come in in the morning the 
 stench is fearful, often so they cannot stand it, and they have to 
 open the doors and windows and go out. The}- say there have 
 been only a dozen burials in the King's Chapel burial-ground 
 latel}\ So much the worse. A few burials, and we have had this 
 experience. The water permeates through those tombs, runs into 
 the basement of the building and fills the whole space under- 
 neath. 
 
 The statute does not contemplate waiting until a case of pesti- 
 lence arises before we can stop it. It is a remedial, preventive 
 process. You are to anticipate the effect of these gases and pre- 
 vent diseases from arising in consequence of them. Sickness and 
 disease have arisen repeatedly, as we are able to show, and I could 
 take up considerable of your time in doing so, if I deemed it 
 essential. The contemplation of the statute is to stop this thing 
 in the future. If our selectmen in 1795 saw the evil from this 
 place to the extent that they said no more interments should be 
 made there if they had the power to control it, how much more a 
 necessit} 7 is it when we have a population of three hundred and 
 fifty thousand, and the evil is growing worse every day. The only 
 plea they make is that our ancestors are buried there, and they 
 want to be buried there too. That is a matter of sentiment which 
 would be taken out of these people if they would look into the 
 tombs and see how the remains of their ancestors appear. I do 
 not believe one-half of them would allow themselves to be buried 
 there. 
 
 These people profess to have much respect for their ancestors ; 
 but when we tried to find some one to repair a tomb we could not, 
 and have had to repair it at the expense of the city ; and subse- 
 quently, when a man with a right in the tomb turned up and we 
 presented the bill, he would say, I don't know as I have such an 
 interest in it that I care to pa} T such a bill. The community is not 
 called upon to bear the offensive smell of decaying bodies simply 
 because the ancestors of these people are buried there. 
 
 The Chairman. — A great many of these people want the city 
 to provide them with a place of burial somewhere else. How is 
 the statute on that point? 
 
 Mr. Keith. — Nothing is said about that, one way or the other. 
 
Appendix. 45 
 
 It is undoubtedly within the discretion of the city to do as it 
 pleases. One» thing may be said, the rights which these people 
 have, never cost them anything, but descended from their ances- 
 tors. If the city took possession of the grounds and used them 
 for another purpose, then I should think it would be called upon 
 to make suitable remuneration for them. But if it simply orders 
 the tombs closed, then I do not see why it should make remuner- 
 ation. The statute simply contemplates closing the tombs. 
 Mr. Wyman. — Who has the ownership in these lands? 
 Mr. Keith. — I cannot tell whether it originally belonged to 
 the town, or not. My impression is it belonged to the town, which 
 was in the habit of granting permits to use the tombs ; but that 
 implied that the ownership of the fee vested in the town. 
 
 Mr. Wyman. — If these places are closed up, will the land 
 revert to an}- one else, as in the case of a street, wheu it is aban- 
 doned by the city the land reverts to the original owners? 
 
 Mr. Keith. — That is where the vote was originally to take the 
 land for a street. The difference between the two cases is this : 
 when land is taken for a street, it is used for street purposes, and 
 when its use as a street is given up, it reverts to the original pos- 
 sessors. But in this case the town originally owned the land, it 
 voted to give not the land, but an easement in it for purposes of 
 burial. If the title comes into anybody's hands, I think it will 
 be the city of Boston. 
 
 Mr. Barry. — Suppose the city should stop burials there, it 
 would not have the right to use the land for an}- other purpose, 
 except by getting an Act of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Keith. — That is my idea at present. The present statute 
 enables the city to close the tombs so that the}- shall not be used 
 in the future. 
 
 Mr. Wyman. — I am informed that if the}- are closed, the abut- 
 ting owners will claim that the land reverts to them. 
 
 Mr. Keith. — That question should be referred to the City Solic- 
 itor. I have no idea that the claim is well-founded. My own idea 
 is that the land originally belonged to the town. 
 
 Mr. Barry. — The Board of Health says that all the tombs are 
 in bad condition. Suppose there are some in good condition, 
 would the city have a right to close them? 
 
 Mr. Keith. — You will see by the statute that we have not got 
 to show that a tomb is in bad condition : " The City Council of 
 any city may, upon the report of the Board of Health thereof that 
 the public health requires it, and after public notice and hearing 
 in the manner hereinafter provided, forbid future interments in 
 any tomb or tombs in the city." The Board of Health report 
 that the public health requires that future interments in these 
 tombs should be prohibited. They do not have to show that a 
 particular tomb is in a dilapidated condition. 
 
 Dr. Durgin. — We worked nearly two years under the old law 
 with the hope of notifying the proprietors, and then taking the 
 step which we have now taken to close those tombs. We found 
 it utterly impossible to do so. We employed a man for a year or 
 more to look up these very records, and see if it were possible to 
 
46 City Document No. 96. 
 
 notify the proprietors according to the old law, which required 
 that at least one owner in each tomb should be served with a 
 notice. 
 
 The fact that the Board of Health consider the tombs a nuisance, 
 and that public health requires they shall be closed, is not of 
 recent origin. 
 
 In regard to the stench in the Board of Health office, of which 
 Mr. Keith spoke, you can now go down there and see from half a 
 dozen to forty of those large blue flies collected in the cracks in 
 the walls facing that burial-ground, — a condition of things } t ou 
 never see except where a stench exists. That is within five feet of 
 where 1113* desk used to be, and that is the condition of things we are 
 obliged to have, when the windows are open. The stench is de- 
 cidedly bad ; it has affected my health as it has that of other mem- 
 bers of the board. Mr. Phillips made a great point about these 
 bodies being buried several feet under the surface of the ground. 
 He ought to know that these tombs are the worst possible places 
 for the escape of gases ; that } t ou cannot confine them in the tomb. 
 
 In 1843, during an investigation in regard to prohibiting the 
 further interment of bodies in cities in Great Britain, it was found 
 that gases came up from a grave twenty feet deep. Several ph3 T si- 
 cians stated that five or six feet of earth above the bodies would 
 be sufficient to confine the gases ; but it was afterward proved that 
 it was not sufficient. The idea that a covering of a few feet of 
 earth will confine these gases has been proved to be entirely erro- 
 neous. It is true that a few feet of earth may confine a certain 
 degree of animal matter so that you will not perceive it ; but it is 
 not true that a large amount of gas can be confined under the same 
 depth of earth. We maintain that the soil in King's Chapel and 
 Granary Burying-grounds is literally saturated with these bodies. 
 Giving to each tomb ten bodies, — and there are fort}^ to fifty in 
 some of them, — } t ou will have nearly three thousand bodies in 
 those two little grounds. You can very easily imagine what con- 
 dition the earth is in. The time has long since arrived when 
 further interments there should be prohibited. This has been the 
 sentiment in all large cities abroad, and decided measures have 
 been taken to prohibit further burials within city limits. In re- 
 gard to St. Paul's Church, an act has been passed not only pro- 
 hibiting further burials under it, but absolutely requiring that the 
 bodies now under the church should be carried away. If the city 
 is responsible for the care of those grounds, something should be 
 done to make their condition safe. On pulling away the grass 
 alongside one of those tombs, I disclosed a hole some ten inches 
 in diameter showing that about three feet of the tomb had 
 already settled ; it will soon give in. We have to hire people to 
 cut this grass and make those places reasonably safe. A man cut- 
 ting the grass is in danger of going through. 
 
 Mr. Keith. — If the grounds are closed, and the Board of Health 
 have authority to care for them, they will be kept in repair. 
 
 Dr. Green, City Physician. — I feel very confident that the 
 Board of Health cannot urge with too much force the necessity of 
 closing these graveyards. I have as much interest in each of them 
 
Appendix. 47 
 
 as almost any one. I have ancestors tying in each, and I say, by 
 all means shut them up. That would be my opinion of what most 
 persons would do who have members of their family buried there. 
 Naturally the persons who feel the least interest in closing them 
 are not those who come here to give their opinions to you. Those 
 who feel a strong desire not to have the tombs closed come here. 
 
 I cannot tell what will become of the fee of the land, but I have 
 an opinion, based upon something I have seen, that these two 
 graveyards were originally one. King's Chapel Graveyard, the old- 
 est in the city, was probably a tract in the outskirts of the village, 
 and undoubtedly interments were made in a part of it which we now 
 call the Granary Burial-ground. Afterwards, when Tremont street 
 was laid out, they found a part of the tract of land that had not been 
 used for burial, and straightened the street and carried it through, 
 making two separate burial-grounds. I have no doubt that at one 
 time in the early history of Boston, the two graveyards were 
 spoken of as the same, but the street having been laid out, they 
 have practically become two distinct grounds. 
 
 Mr. Perkins.- — Do you think the public health requires this 
 measure ? 
 
 Dr. Green. — I do, most decidedly. I have often noticed what 
 Dr. Durgin mentioned, that in the warm part of the year you can 
 see twenty to one hundred of these large blue flies huddled to- 
 gether in the cracks of the walls where the Board of Health w r as 
 located. 
 
 Mr. Perkins. — What is your opinion about the condition of 
 the grounds? 
 
 Dr. Green. — The}' are bad indeed. Knowing the}' were bad, I 
 was surprised to find them so bad. I did not see a tomb I thought 
 in good order. 
 
 Mr. Perkins. — Then, in the short time you spent there this after- 
 noon, you saw that the tombs were in bad condition? 
 
 Dr. Green. — Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Barry. — If the city closed the tombs, parties having rights 
 in them cannot bring a legal action under the statute? Mr. 
 Phillips could not sue the city? 
 
 Mr. Keith. — It is one thing to bring a suit; another thing to 
 maintain it. There is no legal ground to maintain a suit, in con- 
 sequence of the tombs being closed to burials ; that being done 
 under authority of the Legislature. As long as we follow that act 
 there is no ground of action for closing the tomb. That is my 
 judgment as a lawyer. 
 
 Mr. Perkins. — We made a very careful examination of the 
 tombs, and were obliged to mark fourteen bad, twelve very bad, ten 
 fair, and two open. 
 
 Adjourned. 
 
48 City Document No. 96. 
 
 KING'S CHAPEL BUEYING-GROUND. 
 
 FIRST HEARING. 
 
 July 22, 1870. 
 
 The committee met at 2 o'clock, P.M. 
 
 Present. — Aldermen Tucker, chairman, and Robinson; Coun- 
 cil men Perkins, Bariy, and Wyman. 
 
 The clerk read the call, and the report of the Board of Health, 
 recommending that further interments in the ground be prohibited ; 
 and the chair announced that the committee were prepared to hear 
 remonstrances. 
 
 Mary E. Seaver, representing tomb No. 10, asked if the tombs 
 are closed, if the city will furnfsh a buiying-spot elsewhere, she 
 not being able to provide another. Her family have been buried 
 there. No other heirs claim the tomb except her famity. She was 
 no relation to the party named in the list, James T. Austin, the 
 tomb having come to her family from Zachariah Jahonnet, and 
 been in their possession about fort}' 3 T ears, if not longer. She 
 objected to the tomb being closed without she could have a burial- 
 spot elsewhere. . There are, perhaps, ten or eleven members of the 
 famih T likel}* to be buried there. The last burial was Charlotte 
 Seaver, an adult, who died three years ago. 
 
 J. G. Bell, representing tomb No. 22, objected to its being 
 closed. No interments there to make it detrimental to the public 
 health. Do not think one of the family will be buried there, but 
 it is the only burial-place they have now. It was five or six years 
 since the tomb was opened. The tomb is in thorough repair, and 
 has always been kept in good condition. He spoke only for him- 
 self, Mr. Edward Bell and Mr. Wm. A. Bowdlear being the other 
 owners. There is some mistake about the list representing a party 
 by the name of Wells having an interest in this tomb. On the old 
 plan you will find it marked as the Crafts and Bell tomb. Do not 
 think it is detrimental to public health, because there are not inter- 
 ments enough to make it so. The swill-carts which go about the 
 streets are more detrimental. He expected to be buried at this 
 place or in the Granary. Visited this tomb not three days ago. 
 It is near Tremont street, next to the Chapel, on the right-hand 
 side, near School street, two or three tombs from the street. 
 
 Wm. Hayden, representing tomb No. 5, in the name of Wm. and 
 Edwin Davis, asked what it was proposed to do, whether the city 
 contemplated removing the remains, or hermetically sealing the 
 tombs. There is no one connected with his family who would be 
 likely to be interred there, and he did not care to retain it as a place 
 of sepulture for himself. He should object to removing any of the re- 
 mains, and wished the tomb closed so it shall never be opened 
 again. There have been no interments there for five or six 3'ears. 
 His grandfather, Edward Davis, who lived all his life in State 
 street, and occupied for fifty years the estate upon which the Tre- 
 
Appendix. 49 
 
 mont bank recently erected a new building, owned the property, 
 made a thorough repair of the tomb, and died in 1811, ver}' soon 
 after the repairs were made. Mr. Hayden himself had the inte- 
 rior arranged some ten or a dozen years ago, and had not heard 
 an}' complaint from the tomb. The tomb is on this side of the 
 burial-ground, just below the probate office. If the remains are 
 left in the tomb he should not object to their being closed. 
 
 W. Dawes Coolidge, representing tomb No. 19, inherited from 
 his grandfather, Wm. Dawes, said that when Mr. tierce was 
 Mayor the speaker consulted with those interested in this tomb. 
 They left the matter pretty much with him, and he proposed to 
 the city some four j*ears ago that if it would give him a lot in a 
 proper location he would not object to closing the tomb. This is 
 a natural question which fills the heart of almost every one having 
 an interest in the tombs. He proposed to relinquish his right if 
 the city would give him another lot as it did his mother, who had 
 one on Boylston street and received one at Mt. Auburn from the 
 city. The mayor thanked him for the proposal, and said he would 
 place it on file. He would be most happy to unite with the city, 
 and supposed that the high-toned honor of Boston would not de- 
 prive him of his burial-place without providing him with an- 
 other. 
 
 The Chairman. — The committee are not prepared to enter into 
 an}- contract of that kind. Their object is to obtain the views and 
 feelings of the owners. 
 
 Mr. Coolidge. — I should gladly cooperate with the cit} 7 in any 
 wish it may have. There was an interment there about a year 
 and a half ago, but it was not in his branch of the family. It was 
 an old lady. The tomb had always been in good order. If any- 
 thing wrong came to his knowledge about the place where his 
 father and mother lie, he would take care of it. The tomb is near the 
 south-west corner of City Hall, and would have been covered by 
 thirty feet removal of the chapel. He presumed no one has any 
 right in the soil. The town never gave an} T right in the land, but 
 simply the right of burial. 
 
 Thomas Minns appeared for tomb No. 9. To see what bearing 
 the interments had on the public health he examined the City Reg- 
 istrar's office to find the records of the last five } 7 ears. He found 
 that the burials in 1874 were two, in 1875, two, in 1876, one, in 
 1877, none, in 1878, four, making nine interments in five years, or 
 on an average of one in less than six months. The removals from 
 other cities and towns to this burial-ground were, three in 1874, 
 two in 1875, one in 1876, none in 1877, one in 1878, making a 
 total of seven in five years. Miss Mary Clement, the last surviv- 
 ing daughter of the owner of the tomb, thinks it would be an act 
 of gross injustice and hardship to deprive her of the right to be laid 
 where her parents and sisters are, and where she proposes to be 
 laid. The last interment was in 1872. Previous to that there was 
 a temporary interment in 1870, and the previous one was in 1865. 
 He saw the tomb in 1870, and it was in perfect condition. Miss 
 Clement is very old and infirm, her family all lie there, and when 
 she dies the race will be extinguished. It is one of those excep- 
 
50 City Document No. 96. 
 
 tional cases which ought to be provided for. Should think there 
 are perhaps the remains of twenty persons in the tomb. Think 
 there are none others of the family besides Miss Clement that care 
 particularly to use it. 
 
 Eliza P. Baker, represented tomb No. 26, speaking for Mar- 
 garet Hopkins, especially. Her sister is seventy -five years old, 
 feels very bad, and don't want to have the tomb closed. It has 
 been open but once in fifteen years, when her mother was buried, 
 until last August, when her father died. The undertaker said the 
 condition of the tomb was good. Mrs. Newcomb, who has an 
 interest in No. 26, removed her husband to Woodlawn about a 
 month ago, and a brother was temporarily buried there last 
 August, and afterwards taken to Woodlawn. No smell came up from 
 the tomb then. They are all poor; could not get another place, 
 and would like to be buried there. Mr. Joseph Clyde owns the 
 tomb, and it was her Grandfather Clyde who had it built. It is 
 right here at the gate, with a brown top to it. They would have 
 no objection to the tomb being closed if the city would provide 
 them with another place. 
 
 Mrs. Harriet W. Lovering, representing tomb No. 1, said it 
 was open a year ago last June ; there are seven bodies in it now. 
 The tomb was cleaned in 1864 ; is in excellent condition ; there are 
 about seven members of the family who are to be buried there, and 
 they are not able to buy another place. They would be willing to 
 take another place. 
 
 Clara Wendell also represented tomb No. 1, and said only her 
 mother and herself were left. They had no objection to closing 
 the tomb if another place is provided them. She had often 
 thought that if she had the means she should decided^ prefer to 
 remove the remains of her father from that place, and would be 
 very happy to do so if the city would allow her the money. Her 
 father, mother, and all her folks were residents of Boston. 
 
 Mary E. Hathaway, representing tomb No. 4, said that her 
 own children, her mother, grandmother, and all her ancestors are 
 buried there. Her mother was buried there some ten } r ears ago, 
 and her son nine years ago. If the tombs are closed she would 
 not remonstrate on her own responsibilit}'. Her aunt had the 
 tomb put in good condition nine years ago, when the last inter- 
 ment took place. 
 
 Frank W. Bigelow, representing tomb No. 11, built by James 
 Johnson, in 1787, said that in 1849, or thereabouts, there was a 
 hole in the entrance, and his father had it repaired, and the planks 
 replaced with stone. There are only four coffins there. Don't 
 think there has been an interment since 1814, though there has 
 been a temporary one. Do not think it is right to disturb the 
 tombs if they are not a nuisance, and do not think they are. 
 Reside in Weston. Would rather have these places remain just as 
 they are. Five generations of his mother's family are buried in the 
 King's Chapel Buiying-ground. 
 
 Mrs. E. J. Coy said she had a brother and four sisters in the 
 infant's tomb, as well as a grandmother. Have no objection to 
 the tomb being closed if another place is provided. 
 
Appendix. 51 
 
 C. L. Ridgway appeared for tomb No. 20, at the corner of School 
 street. He objected to its being closed, even if another place is 
 provided. The last interment was that of a child, five years ago. 
 His family are buried there ; have no other place of interment. If 
 the city would give him the best place in Mt. Auburn for his right 
 in this tomb, perhaps he would take it. There are as many to be 
 buried there as the tomb will hold. He did not see any reason for 
 shutting the tomb. So far as accepting another place is concerned 
 he would say about that as one would about bu3 T ing a horse — 
 should like to see it first. 
 
 Edward R. Broaders appeared as one of the heirs of tomb No. 
 34. He had no objection to its being closed, provided the city 
 will furnish another suitable place for burial. He agreed with the 
 views of Mr. Coolidge. Should think there were eight or ten 
 bodies in the tomb. Himself and his brother are the only direct 
 descendants that remain. His children are mostly provided for 
 in other places. He should like to be buried there because his 
 father, mother, grandfather, and grandmother, and ancestors 
 farther back than that are laid there. The tomb has been in the 
 family one hundred years. Understand it is in good order. Have 
 not seen it for a good many years. Have been absent for the last 
 sixteen years. Think it was opened about two years ago, to take 
 out two persons that had been previously buried there. They 
 were buried about six years previous to that. 
 
 Mr. Minns presented a request signed by himself, Mr. Bigelow, 
 and others, requesting an adjournment of the hearing to the time 
 of the adjourned hearing on the Granary Burial-ground, that evi- 
 dence may be presented on the question of the effect of burials on 
 public health. 
 
 The committee consulted, and the chairman announced that the 
 next hearing would be on Thursday, September 4, at two, P.M. 
 
 SECOND HEARING. 
 
 Thursday, Sept. 4, 1879. 
 
 The committee met at two o'clock, P.M. 
 
 Present. — Aldermen Tucker, chairman, and Robinson ; Coun- 
 cilmen Perkins, Barry, and Wyman. 
 
 Thomas Wm. Clarke appeared in behalf of himself and the 
 other proprietors of tombs upon the Tremont-street front, espe- 
 cially representing tomb 15 originally belonging to Samuel Tyley. 
 He desired and obtained leave to introduce evidence. 
 
 John Hassam, a conveyancer, in the habit of visiting the reg- 
 istry of deeds and probate building very often, nearly every day 
 for fifteen or sixteen years, stated in reply to questions by Mr. 
 Clarke that he had never noticed any offence or nuisance from the 
 King's Chapel Burying-ground. Was present a few days since 
 when some of the tombs were opened, stood near them, and did 
 not notice any nuisance or offensive odor when they were opened. 
 
52 City Document No. 96. 
 
 Some had a large number of coffins, but nothing bad in them, 
 There were many people on the sidewalk looking in ; heard n6ne 
 of them remark anything about the tombs being offensive. It was 
 quite a warm, muggy day. The desk he usualty occupied in the 
 registry is at the window opposite Tremont street, looking directly 
 out upon this tomb, and if there had been anything offensive he 
 should have noticed it. Know all the people who have come there 
 for years examining titles and never heard any one sa} r anything 
 about it. (To Mr. Perkins.) Detected no offensive odor. Did not 
 look into all of them. Noticed nothing unusual about the tomb 
 nearest the registiy of deeds on Tremont street when it was opened. 
 Could not tell by their looks whether the coffins had been there a 
 long time or not. Am very quick to detect odors. Some of the 
 coffins were much discolored and black. (To Mr. Bariy.) Took 
 a general look at all of them. Thought they were in admirable 
 condition. Was surprised to find them in such a good condition. 
 
 Dr. John Homans, a physician in practice about seventeen or 
 eighteen years, testified in answer to Mr. Clarke's questions, that 
 he had been familiar with the King's Chapel Burying-ground in 
 that time ; am familiar, by observation, with the condition of cities 
 abroad where intramural interments are practised, particularly 
 London and Vienna. 
 
 Mr. Clarke stated that it appeared from the City Registrar's 
 Record, that in 1874 five tombs were opened in King's Chapel 
 Buiying-ground, two for interment, and three for removal ; four 
 were opened in 1875, two for interment, and two for removal ; two 
 in 1876, one for interment, and one for removal ; none in 1877 ; 
 six in 1878, four for interment, and two for removal; making an 
 average of three or four tombs opened in each year, some for in- 
 terment and some for removal. 
 
 Dr. Homans said the effect of that upon the health of the city 
 in that neighborhood would be inappreciable. There is no better 
 disinfectant than earth. 
 
 Mr. Clarke asked Dr. Homans what he thought of the statement 
 in the report of the Board of Health as to the value of the King's 
 Chapel ground for building and other purposes. 
 
 The Chairman ruled that that had nothing to do with the ques- 
 tion before the committee. 
 
 Mr. Clarke desired to put the question as a matter of sanitary 
 experience. 
 
 The Chairman thought that was diverting from the subject before 
 the committee. 
 
 Mr. Clarke desired to put the question and have the committee 
 rule upon it, whether building upon that ground and destroying it 
 as a breathing-place would have a greater injury upon public 
 health than five to ten interments a year. 
 
 The Chairman decided that the question of building on the 
 ground was not before the committee. 
 
 Mr. Clarke asked for a vote of the committee upon the ques- 
 tion, and the chairman consented. 
 
 Mr. Perkins understood they were simply considering the expe- 
 diency of closing the tombs and prohibiting interments. 
 
Appendix. 53 
 
 Mr. Wyman understood that erecting buildings there had nothing 
 to do with the question before the committee. 
 
 Mr. Clarke understood that the Board of Health had recom- 
 mended it. 
 
 Mr. Perkins said there was nothing of the kind in the order. 
 They are simply to consider the expediency of closing the tombs 
 on sanitary grounds ; but building upon the land had never been 
 mentioned. 
 
 Dr. Homans, in reply to questions by Mr. Perkins, said the effect 
 of burying-grounds upon the health of people in localities near 
 them depended much upon the crowded state of the population. 
 At the North End, where there are crowded tenements, it would be 
 unhealthy ; but around the St. James Hotel it would not have so 
 bad an effect. Had never heard that Park street or its vicinity 
 was unhealthy. (To Mr. Clarke.) Was in the army ; have had 
 experience about large burying-grounds where a great number of 
 dead have been buried at one time. Never noticed any very par- 
 ticular difficulty arising from troops encamped in the neighborhood, 
 if the dead had been property buried. If they encamped in the 
 neighborhood of a battle-field, the horses and mules might not all 
 have been buried, and of course the}' would make a disagreeable 
 odor. (To Mr. Perkins.) As a general rule the troops never 
 remained long enough in one position to test that question, and 
 the battle-field was left soon after the battle was fought, but not 
 for sanitary reasons. 
 
 Mr. Perkins. — Many troops were buried on the ground of the first 
 Bull Run battle, and many troops were encamped around there 
 before the second Bull Run. I know it was generally considered 
 important to get away from those localities. 
 
 Dr. S. L. Abbott, a physician in practice since 1841, testified 
 in answer to questions by Mr. Clarke, that he had had a great many 
 patients in the neighborhood of the chapel and Granary Burying- 
 grounds and in the Tremont House. Did not consider the Tremont 
 House a particularly unhealthy locality on account of its vicinity 
 to the buiying-ground. Had never seen a case of sickness there 
 which could in any way be attributable to the influence of the 
 burial-ground. Do not consider that four or five interments a year 
 in King's Chapel Burying-ground could injure the public health in 
 the slightest degree, if they are made decently. Cannot conceive 
 of their doing any possible harm. The danger from a great 
 amount of organic matter decomposing in crowded communities 
 would be usually more from the injury that the drinking-water 
 might sustain by filtering through such a soil ; any bad odor from 
 the burying-ground might be offensive, and if continued might 
 make people sick ; but it would be entirely impossible to prevent 
 anything of the kind in the burying-ground. He remembered 
 visiting a burying-ground in Frederick City- crowded with dead 
 soldiers ; but there was not the slightest bad odor about it. The 
 soldiers were buried in ranks side by side, in long trenches. (To 
 Mr. Perkins.) There have been a great variety of diseases that I 
 have treated in the vicinity of these grounds, but have not had one 
 case of fever. They were most of them cases of boarders in the 
 
54 City Document No. 96. 
 
 hotel, and occasionally a domestic. The only case of zymotic dis- 
 ease, which is considered contagious, was two or three years ago, 
 in March, I think, b}* a gentleman who arrived from an extended 
 tour in the West, and was taken with diphtheria almost immedi- 
 ately on his arrival. Do not think I have had a case of dysentery 
 during the time I have been called there. That is a class of dis- 
 eases likely to be caused by effluvia and the disturbance of the 
 digestive organs. Neither had he heard any complaint from the 
 inmates and people employed in the house of any bad odor from 
 the burying-ground. 
 
 Wm. B. Trask, for many years in the habit of visiting the His- 
 torical Society rooms in the Probate building, testified in answer to 
 Mr. Clarke, that he had had occasions enough in the past thirty 
 years to notice anything noxious or any deleterious odor or nui- 
 sance from the graveyard, but had never observed the least thing. 
 Had asked the question, whether there was any complaint, and the 
 answer had invariably been, not in the least. About twentj* years 
 ago he was sick with nervous prostration, and on his recover} 7 he 
 was particularly sensitive about this sort of thing, and his family 
 remarked it. The Registry of Deeds and Probate building is rather 
 a pleasant place to work in. (To Mr. Perkins.) Was present in 
 the office looking out of the window when the tombs were opened. 
 Detected no odor, not even from the one opened near the Registry 
 of Deeds. 
 
 George A. Fisher, member of the Common Council from Ward 
 24, in answer to Mr. Clarke, testified that he was present the 
 other day when the tombs were opened in the chapel ground ; went 
 into one of them, called the Johnson tomb. There was no percep- 
 tible odor at all. The tomb seemed to be in good condition ; do 
 not know what it was opened for ; was in the Registry of Deeds at 
 work ; was in the tomb three or four minutes. There were four 
 coffins, two on each side ; three of them were whole, apparently, 
 the fourth was broken. There was no offence at all from the re- 
 mains, so far as he could see ; is pretty sensitive to bad odors ; 
 have been at the Registry of Deeds the greater part of the time 
 for twelve years ; have not heard the slightest complaint of the 
 burying-ground from the people who frequent that place ; think the 
 people who frequent the Registry of Deeds are quite a healthy lot. 
 (To Mr. Perkins.) Did not go into the other tombs ; stood olose 
 to the one b} T Tremont street ; it was the second tomb opened-; it 
 was nearer the Registry than the Johnson tomb ; did not look into 
 it ; detected no odor about the tombs at the time they were opened. 
 
 Babson S. Ladd said to Mr. Clarke, that he was present in the 
 Chapel-ground when the tombs were opened last Tuesday. Have 
 been in the habit of working at the Registry for the last sixteen 
 3 T ears quite steadily, and also before that. Have noticed no special 
 sickness among those who do business there. Conveyancers are 
 generally healthy men. The light is poor and the air bad in 
 the Registry, but not on account of the tombs. Went into the 
 Johnson tomb with Mr. Fisher. Should call it dry and in good 
 condition. (To Mr. Perkins.) Never lost a day, except one 
 last June. 
 
Appendix. 55 
 
 Dr. Chad wick, a physician in active practice about six years, 
 said to Mr. Clarke, that he was very well acquainted with the 
 Chapel Burying-ground. Occasional interments at the rate of two 
 to three per annum, such as took place in that ground, would 
 have no effect whatsoever upon the public health. Never noticed 
 anything about the burying-ground that was injurious or a nuisance 
 in any way. (To Mr. Perkins.) Have lived in the neighborhood 
 and passed the grounds daily. Formerly resided on Beacon street. 
 In selecting a place for a residence he should avoid a graveyard 
 he knew nothing about, on sanitary grounds. Know that many 
 eminent physicians have testified in other cities of a prevalence 
 of typhus and other diseases near graveyards, but think it depends 
 upon whether the drinking-water in the neighborhood would be likely 
 to be tainted b} r the surface-water from those grounds. As to 
 whether such grounds would be likely to cause such diseases, each 
 case would have to be considered separate^. Do not think any 
 one could express an opinion worth anything in that vague way ; 
 at least he could not. Mr. Perkins stated that in the great ma- 
 jority of these tombs the bodies were put in, a plank put over 
 them and a little earth over that, and the plank soon rots out. He 
 asked Dr. Chad wick whether he thought diseases were likely to 
 prevail under such circumstances ; and the doctor thought they 
 would. (To Mr. Clark.) If the tomb was carefully cemented with 
 brick and stone, and had a slab cemented over it, the escape of ef- 
 fluvia could not be appreciably distinguished in that neighborhood. 
 (To Mr. Perkins.) If the tombs were in the condition named, and 
 were opened from time to time, the escaping effluvia would con- 
 taminate the surrounding air for about twenty to thirty feet for 
 about twenty minutes. 
 
 Irving Winslow appeared as a representative of tombs 17 and 
 27. The proprietors of the tombs are satisfied from the evidence 
 before the committee that no danger exists to the public health 
 from opening them as they have been. Therefore, they feel free 
 to plead the cause of sentiment. There is a feeling among the 
 proprietors that if their legal rights are taken away, the next step 
 will be to seize the grounds, remove the bodies, and use the land 
 for more profitable purposes. It is unnecessary to touch upon the 
 sanitarj^ value of these open breathing-places. The evidence in 
 that direction quite overbalances the evidence of the unwhole- 
 someness of the ground. There is no practical use likely to be 
 made of the tombs. All his family have burial-places at Mt. 
 Auburn and other cemeteries, but desire to maintain these grounds 
 as monuments to the memory of our honored predecessors. 
 
 Mr. Minns read a letter from B. F. Smith, furnishing undertaker, 
 251 Tremont street, stating that in his business experience of 
 twenty- five years he had never heard any complaint of the tombs 
 in King's Chapel Burying-ground. For seventeen years he was 
 associated with his father, sexton of King's Chapel Church, and 
 was perfectly familiar about the ground. Do not believe there is 
 any call for prohibiting the use of the tombs for sanitary reasons. 
 
 Mr. Minns read the following : — 
 
56 City Document No. 96. 
 
 To the Special Committee on Interments : — 
 
 Gentlemen, — As I cannot conveniently attend the meeting on the 4th of 
 September, I beg leave to make a brief communication in writing. I do not 
 believe that any evil consequences happen from the very rare interments in 
 King's Chapel Burial-ground, nor do I think any such use of it is likely to be 
 made in the future, as to produce illness or inconvenience of any kind. On 
 the contrary, I believe it has a positively beneficial influence, as an open 
 breathing-space in a crowded part of the city. As one of our too few re- 
 maining monuments of the past, I hold it, in common with many others, as of 
 priceless value to a city which has a history like ours. I have sometimes 
 heard " sentiment" spoken lightly of when it was a question of removing old 
 landmarks, and destroying old memorials ; but what would not our friends of 
 Chicago, or Cincinnati, give for one such monumental enclosure, with its 
 records of two hundred years? I am one of those who have personal reasons 
 for being opposed to any movement which there is good reason to believe 
 looks to the eventual desecration of our ancient city church-yards, and as 
 official estimates have been published of the money value of the ground 
 where our forefathers are buried, the next step contemplated can hardly be 
 doubtful. My maternal ancestors of two generations, and many of my 
 family connections have rested, hitherto, undisturbed in the tomb marked No. 
 1, in the King's Chapel Cemetery. I say my ancestors, I mean their bodies, 
 which is all we can cover with our tombstones. And yet not all, for affections 
 and remembrances universally held sacred, follow them to what we fondly 
 suppose is to be their last resting-place, and make its dust holy for those who 
 love them. These are sentiments, but they are sentiments which the poor 
 savages, whom our ancestors displaced, were human enough to cherish. 
 When did a North American Indian ever fail to respect the bones of his 
 ancestors? I ask the same respect for those of mine, and that no step may 
 be taken which is likely to lead to their ejection. 
 
 I am, gentlemen, yours very respectfully, 
 
 OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES. 
 
 Sept. 1, 1879. 
 
 Mr. Minns read the following : — 
 
 Newport, R.I., August 28, 1879. 
 Mr Dear Sir, — I regret to be informed that the authorities of Boston con- 
 template the taking of measures to prevent future interments in the Stone 
 Chapel Burying-ground. As the oldest living member of my family, I protest 
 against such proposed action. Among some old papers in my possession, is 
 one of which the following is a copy : — 
 
 "At a meeting of the Selectmen of the Town of Boston, the 26th of 
 October, 1719, liberty granted to Wm. Hutchinson, and Mr. Francis Brinley, 
 to make a tomb in the old burying-place, on the same spot where Mr. Francis 
 Brinley's relatives were formerly buried, for the interring of the seigneur of 
 the family there. 
 
 A true copy is entered in the records of the Town of Boston. 
 
 Examined, P. R. Joseph Prout Town Clerk." 
 
 This " seigneur " referred to was Francis Brinley, who came to America 
 from England ; married and lived in Newport. His name and standing are 
 well known to all who are acquainted with the colonial history of Rhode 
 Island. He had estates in Boston, which he frequently visited. He died 
 there at an advanced age, having survived his children ; but there were two 
 grandchildren, both of them born in England. They and their widowed 
 mother came to America by his invitation. One of these grandchildren was 
 a daughter, who married Wm. Hutchinson ; the other was a son, Col. Francis 
 Brinley, of Datchet House, Roxbury, Mass. They were the persons to whom 
 liberty was given "to make a tomb." In it repose the remains of my great- 
 great grandfather ; of my great grandfather and great grandmother ; of my grand- 
 father and grandmother ; of my father and mother, and of a sister ; there I 
 wish them to remain. I respectfully insist that there must be an overwhelming 
 
Appendix. 57 
 
 indisputable necessity to justify a nullification of the vote of the selectmen, 
 to which I have adverted ; and I also insist that no proof of such necessity 
 exists. To prevent interments in the Stone Chapel Burying-ground, cannot 
 be from mere sanitary consideration ; hence, a vote of the proprietors should 
 be had before the city can be justified in undertaking a measure which will 
 tend to depreciate a most valuable property, as is this God's acre, for the 
 benefit of anybody but those whose feelings and interests are profoundly con- 
 cerned. As I cannot be in Boston at the proposed hearing on the 4th prox. r 
 you are at liberty to use this as you shall deem proper and expedient. 
 Very respectfully your obedient servant, 
 
 FRANCIS BRINLEY. 
 
 Thomas Minns, Esq., 14 Louisburg Sq., Boston, Mass. 
 
 Mr. Minns also read letters from A. J. C. Sowden, and George 
 W. Wales, protesting against the closing of the tombs. 
 
 The Chairman stated that there seemed to be a misunderstand- 
 ing on the part of some of the remonstrants as to the duty of the 
 committee, and at his request Dr. Durgin, on behalf of the Board 
 of Health, stated that they had presented the communication to 
 the City Government, simply from a sanitary point of view. It is 
 not intended to disturb the open spaces or encourage the building 
 of anything upon them ; on the contrary, he should certainly pro- 
 test against any building being erected on those sites ; and said 
 the feeling of the Board of Health was that the ground should be 
 closed against further interments, and the tombs sealed up and 
 made secure, and the beaut}* of the place preserved as far as pos- 
 sible, by the city of Boston. It is not the feeling of the Board of 
 Health that the bodies should be removed from the tombs, unless 
 it be the desire of the proprietors to do so at their pleasure. 
 
 Mr. Clarke called Dr. Durgin's attention to the valuation of 
 the ground, made in the report of the Board of Health of 1877, 
 and the doctor denied that it was intended as a recommendation 
 for the building of a court-house upon the site. The Board had 
 tried in all honorable ways to stir up the City Council and people 
 of Boston, and make them feel that the time had come when no 
 more bodies should be placed there. The Board do not recom- 
 mend the sale of the grounds. He should protest against their 
 sale and against an}* building being placed upon those grounds. 
 The present Board would not be willing to see an}* building placed 
 thereon. He should prefer to have the remains removed, but the 
 Board do not ask for that. If the tombs can be sealed and remain 
 closed, he should ask for nothing more ; but if they are left open 
 and dilapidated, the Board would protest against it, and continue 
 to do so. In reply to questions by Mr. Clarke, Dr. Durgin said 
 he was not present when the tombs were opened, but it was done 
 by permission of the Board of Health to show their condition to 
 the committee. If anything had been improperly disturbed, he 
 should be very sorry. He had no sickly sentiment about this 
 matter, but he had as much feeling of respect for the grounds as 
 any one else, and would do as much towards their beauty and pro- 
 tection as any one else. 
 
 Mr. Minns called Francis Parkman, one of the trustees of the 
 Athenaeum, who said there had been no complaint made by the 
 
58 City Document No. 96. 
 
 proprietors of the Athenaeum about the proximity of the Granary 
 Burial-ground during the twenty-one years he had been trustee. 
 He believed the trustees and the proprietors both regarded the 
 presence of the graveyard as a positive advantage in supplying 
 light and air. That is one of the advantages usually spoken of 
 in regard to the situation of the Athenaeum. 
 
 Mr. Clarke, on behalf of the proprietors of the tombs fronting on 
 Tremont street, said they were all built in 1738, by a special permit 
 granted at a town meeting, under certain conditions which have 
 been complied with. Mr. Clarke read extracts from the records 
 of the town to corroborate this statement, and also further extracts 
 giving the histor}' of the tombs, the repairs made upon them by 
 the proprietors, and the action of the town in relation thereto, 
 all showing that the original conditions had been fully complied 
 with by the proprietors. He said there were too few breathing- 
 places in the city, already. The proprietors were afraid that, if the 
 tombs were closed, the next step would be to remove the remains 
 and confiscate the property for private gain or public use. He did 
 not suppose there was one of the proprietors living who did not 
 feel the highest disgust and indignation at the proposal that the 
 rights which his ancestors had purchased and paid for should be 
 forfeited, when nothing whatever has been shown as regards ai^ 
 particular tomb that is a nuisance. Point to a syllable of evi- 
 dence that authorizes the closing of one of the tombs on the ground 
 that it is a nuisance. If you cannot do that, then when we come 
 to our appeal to the Supreme Court, which we are authorized to 
 make, that is the issue the city have got to try before a jury. Has 
 anything been shown that tomb No. 15 is a nuisance? It had not 
 been opened since he was born. It has been sealed up with a stone 
 slab laid in cement since before he was born, and the proposition 
 is to deprive him of a right in it, — whether or not he proposed to 
 use it is nobody's business. The proprietors want that place kept 
 open as a shrine. They know that the report of the Board of 
 Health, coupled with the statement of the pecuniary value of the 
 land, will tend to the creation of a sentiment in favor of using 
 this land for building purposes. The remains of John Leverett 
 and John Winthrop lie there. Those are names we ought to honor, 
 and in behalf of the memories and associations clustered about 
 such names the proprietors protest against this first attempt to 
 encroach upon the rights of the people who own the tombs in 
 King's Chapel Burying-ground. Not a single case of nuisance had 
 been proved before the committee. We have a history in. these 
 little spots, and Boston cannot afford to have them tampered with. 
 Boston cannot afford to lose them. Faneuil Hall is not very con- 
 venient for a town-house or for public meetings of citizens, but 
 does anybody want to sell it ? Does anybody want to close it and 
 seal it up? So we say to you, leave us this right. It has not 
 been exercised within five years enough to cause any harm. Above 
 all, whatever you do, do not lay the foundation for any use of 
 those grounds which will not leave them open to God's light and 
 air for the benefit of this neighborhood forever. We stand 
 here to defend the rights of the citizens of Boston to have 
 
Appendix. 59 
 
 that breathing-space, and to defend it against the insinuation 
 of the Board of Health in 1877 that it can be sold. The Board 
 of Health say they did not recommend it and do not believe it 
 should be sold. Oh, no ; the}' didn't recommend it ; but they said 
 if it could be sold, a piece of land could be bought somewhere else 
 with the money. We have got them on record finally that it ought 
 not to be done ; but they say that sooner or later the remains must 
 be removed. He stood here to prevent the desecration of those 
 graves under the orders of the Board Health. They are here to 
 resist this first step which the city has no right to take unless each 
 and every tomb is shown to be a nuisance and injurious to public 
 health. That is what must be proved to -a jury on appeal. 
 
 In the course of his remarks, Mr. Clarke dwelt upon the fact, as 
 appeared from the records, that the city tomb known as the 
 Charnel Tomb had been in bad condition, and he strongly con- 
 trasted the neglect of the city authorities with the care which the 
 private owners had exercised over their property. 
 
 Arthur T. Lyman, representing the proprietors of the King's 
 Chapel Church, said the society are entirely opposed to such a use 
 of this burial-ground as would tend to allow it to be built upon, and 
 they are opposed to further interments there. The vestr}- of the 
 church last spring unanimously expressed the wish of the congre- 
 gation that interments should be prevented. Nearly every one 
 having an interest in the tombs has a place of interment provided 
 elsewhere. The church has spent a good deal of money in keeping 
 the tombs in perfect order. Although no nuisance has occurred 
 under the chapel as yet, it is simply because the church looks 
 after the tombs. If an} r neglect occurs they are liable to become a 
 nuisance. A large number of the tombs near the chapel have been 
 opened a good deal of the time last spring and winter. A year or 
 two ago, in the winter or spring, when the frost was in the ground, 
 a burial took place in the north part of the chapel. It was filled 
 in when the ground was frosty ; a heavy rain washed it away, and 
 the surface water poured freely into the tomb. Such things are apt 
 to occur in the burying-ground where there are no individuals con- 
 stantly attending the tombs, and no public body to look after them. 
 Such a case is sufficient to constitute a nuisance. In London fur- 
 ther burials have been prohibited in many of the city cemeteries. 
 In many cases the tombstones have been removed, and the bury- 
 ing-grounds turned into public gardens. 
 
 George E. Lincoln, representing tomb No. 7, said the proprie- 
 tors very seriously object to any steps being taken to close the 
 tombs, and he thoroughly indorsed the remarks of Mr. Clarke. 
 
 E. H. Derby stated that in 1819 he came to reside in the vicinity 
 of those burial-grounds at No. 1 Park street, next to the church, 
 and lived there eight years, part of the time attending the Latin 
 School and part of the time at Harvard College. It was always a 
 healthful spot. The health of the family was excellent, and he 
 remembered no fever or disease of that character during the time he 
 resided there. He appeared for two tombs — No. 16, that belonged 
 to his maternal ancestor, Enoch Brown, a prominent merchant of 
 Boston before and during the Revolutionary War ; the other tomb 
 
60 City Document No. 96. 
 
 was the resting-place of John Arnold, a prominent man in his time, 
 having command of the militia during the war with England. Mr. 
 Derb}- spoke at length of the rights of the proprietors, the respect 
 which should be shown to the memory of those who were buried in 
 the tomb, and said that from the evidence he could see no adequate 
 reason for closing the tomb. If he could be assured that no build- 
 ing would be placed upon the ground in the future, he would be 
 inclined to acquiesce in the closing of the tombs ; but he was very 
 fearful he could not get an assurance on that subject. He thought 
 it best to stand on the title which they held. 
 
 Mr. Derby filed the following with the committee : — 
 
 To the Eon. the City Council of Boston : — 
 
 The undersigned, E. Hasket Derby, respectfully states that he has been for 
 many years the sole owner of tomb No. 16, near the centre of King's Chapel 
 Burying-ground, with rights in the land adjacent. That it contains the dust of 
 his maternal ancestors ; that he has repaired the same from respect for the 
 honored dead. That there have been no interments in it for nearly half a cen- 
 tury ; that he wishes to keep it inviolate and in proper repair. He therefore 
 respectfully protests against any action of the city government that shall im- 
 pair the value of his estate in said tomb and land. 
 
 ELIAS HASKET DERBY. 
 
 Abigail C. Lloyd, representing tomb No. 26, said it had 
 always been taken care of, and was in good condition. She is the 
 only one remaining of her mother's family, and would like to be 
 laid there. The last interment was about a year ago last August. 
 There are four more likely to be buried there. She would prefer to 
 be buried there rather than accept another place offered by the city. 
 
 Henry E. Holland said his mother is buried in a tomb marked and 
 belonging to Mr. Martin Smith. He had also four infants buried 
 there, and his father and great grandfather were buried there. He did 
 not want to have their remains disturbed, though if the city would 
 give a good lot and remove the remains there he would not object. 
 
 Mary A. Nims spoke in regard to the Wm. Moore tomb, and 
 said she had a brother who wished to be buried there. The tomb 
 was used about three years ago. She would prefer that the tomb 
 remain as it is. 
 
 O. L. Fern, representing tomb No. 24, said there were many 
 people who are likely to be buried there. He had not so much ob- 
 jection to the closing of the tomb as other members of the family 
 had, if a suitable place is provided at the expense of the city- He 
 would prefer to have the tomb remain as it is on the whole. If the 
 city provided a place acceptable to him he would not object. 
 
 This closed the public hearing. 
 
 Dr. Durgin explained to the committee that the paragraph so 
 often quoted from the Board of Health of 1877, in regard to the 
 valuation of the land, was never intended as a recommendation 
 that the land be sold or built upon. The Board had been endeav- 
 oring to attract the attention of the City Council to this subject, 
 and this was one of the means used to accomplish that end. The 
 Board had never contemplated selling or building upon the burial- 
 ground. 
 
Appendix. 61 
 
 A ACT to Amend Chapter Twenty-Eight of the General 
 Statutes in Respect to Closing Tombs in Cities. 
 
 Be it enacted, etc., as follows: — 
 
 Section 1. The City Council of any city may, upon report of 
 the Board of Health thereof that the public health requires it, and 
 after public notice and hearing in the manner hereinafter provided, 
 forbid future interment in any tomb or tombs within the city 
 limits. 
 
 Section. 2. The report of the Board of Health above mentioned 
 shall specif}^ the tomb or tombs to which its action refers, and 
 name the owner or owners thereof if the same be known ; and 
 thereupon the citj' clerk shall give notice to such owner or 
 owners as are known and reside within the Commonwealth, and 
 shall likewise publish a notice at least twice a week for four 
 consecutive weeks, in two or more newspapers published in 
 the city, or in the county wherein said city is situated. The 
 said notice shall recite the report of said Board of Health, and 
 shall notify all parties interested in the premises to appear before 
 a Joint Committee of the City Council, at a time not less than two 
 nor more than three months from last publication of said notice, 
 and show cause why the report of said Board of Health should not 
 be accepted, and the tomb or tombs therein mentioned be closed. 
 After such hearing, the City Council may, upon a vote of both 
 branches thereof, and with the approval of the Mayor, declare said 
 tomb or tombs to be closed, and no interments shall thereafter be 
 permitted therein. 
 
 Section 3. Whenever in the judgment of the Board of Health 
 of any city any tomb therein needs repair, it shall give notice 
 thereof to the known owner, or if there be more than one, to one 
 of the known owners thereof, requiring that said tomb be put in a 
 proper state of repair within three months from the date thereof; 
 and if the owner or owners of said tomb be unknown, then the 
 Board of Health may publish notice in the manner provided in 
 section two, requiring the owner or owners to repair said tomb 
 within the time above mentioned ; and if the owner or owners do 
 not repair said tomb within the time mentioned, then the Board of 
 Health may enter upon said tomb and make the repairs needed, at 
 the expense of said city. If the public health requires immediate 
 action, the Board of Health may make the necessar} T repairs, the 
 cost of which shall be refunded upon demand, by the owner or 
 owners of such tomb. If the city shall incur any expense in re- 
 gard to any tomb, in the manner before specified, the said tomb 
 shall be held by said Board of Health, and no further use shall be 
 made of said tomb until the owner or owners thereof shall pay the 
 expense of said repairs and interest thereon ; and after twenty 
 years' possession under this act for non-repairs, all interest and 
 right of burial in any such tomb shall vest in the cit} 7 in which the 
 same is situate. 
 
62 City Document No. 96. 
 
 Section 4. The provisions of section three of chapter twenty- 
 eight of the General Statutes shall apply to all tombs in public 
 cemeteries in cities, and the boards of health in cities shall exer- 
 cise, in regard to such tombs, the powers granted by said section 
 to trustees or directors of certain corporations. 
 
 Section 5. Any person aggrieved by the action of the City 
 Council or Board of Health under this act, may appeal therefrom 
 in the manner provided by sections nine and ten of chapter twent} T - 
 eight of the General Statutes. 
 
 Section 6. The provisions of section eighty-nine of chapter 
 fort3 T -three of the General Statutes shall apply to the erection of 
 any building upon any burial-ground or cemetery belonging to any 
 cit} r in the Commonwealth. 
 
 Section 7. This act shall take effect upon its passage. 
 
 Approved May 4, 1877.