USA > Massachusetts > Suffolk County > Boston > Old Copp's Hill and Burial Ground : with historical sketches, March 1, 1882 > Part 11
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13
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 burying-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 very 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. Ifyou close it up by the right
39
APPENDIX.
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 tomb 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 very limited means have struggled along until they are threescore years 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 burying- ground, had never heard any complaint of injurious effect from burials on that ground, and had never perceived any bad effeet himself.
Mr. PHILLIPS read a letter from Hon. Alphens 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 canse 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 city grounds during thirty-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 day since he has been in Boston. His wife had not been well for some years; but her family, 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 yesterday, and saw no tombs except what were in perfect condition. He had two children, and they had always 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. 96.
HENRY G. DENNY, representing one-half of tomb No. 111, built 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. If 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 eighty-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 any 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
41
APPENDIX.
remains from any 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 handy, 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 city ; or if the city will provide such a place as they would choose, the owners would not object. He would prefer that the city would give them the money 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
43
APPENDIX.
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 Granary 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 every 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 employed 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. Every 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 had a population of eighteen thousand. He inferred that the selectmen would have closed the tombs had they 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, saying 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 burying-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 lias 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 years 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 say that when they 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. They say there have been only a dozen burials in the King's Chapel burial-ground lately. 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 necessity 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 pay 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.
45
APPENDIX.
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 any one else, as in the case of a street, when 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 any 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 they shall not be used in the future.
Mr. WYMAN .- I am informed that if they 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.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.