220 Froceedinc/s of the Royal Society of Victoria. 



Sir Jas. F. Stephen's judgment in the case of Dr. Price, 

 ill 1874, set at rest the question of the legality of Cremation 

 ill England, and decided that there was then no law against 

 it there, so long as no nuisance was caused. Of course no 

 system of disposing of the dead should be tolerated, unless 

 all that can be called a nuisance is absolutely prevented. The 

 objection to burial is that it produces evils far worse than 

 nuisances. Since the judgment in question, the Cremation 

 Society of England, though previously deterred by the 

 discountenance of the Home Secretary, proceeded at once to 

 cremate, and has continued to do so since. The same view 

 appears to have been officially taken here, in the Metro- 

 politan General Cemetery Bill, which was introduced by the 

 Government in the Legislative Assembly in 1891, but made 

 no further progress. The existence of this Bill implies that 

 no legal objection to Cremation could be discovered. It 

 provides " for the establishment and management of a 

 Metropolitan General Cemetery " at Frankston, with nine 

 managers ; two to be appointed by the Government, and 

 seven to be elected by the Councils of eighteen city and 

 surburban corporations. £20,000 was to be granted from 

 the consolidated revenue to start with, and the corporations 

 were to contribute .€2500 a year, until the fees to be 

 charged should amount to a sufftcient sum to defray 

 expenses. The cemetery consists of 8008 acres, worth 

 ,€15,000; distance from Melbourne 20 miles. It is 11 1 

 miles round, and the cost of fencing it has been estimated at 

 X^24,000. More thousands are required for a short branch 

 railway. The Bill provides that the managers may make 

 regulations, to be approved by the Governor in Council, 

 prescribing fees for burials, &c., and also for cremations. 

 Section 71 provides that any one may direct by Will or 

 otherwise, that his body shall be cremated, and that his 

 executors or others may carry his direction into effect, in 

 the cemetery, under-regulations to be made under Section 77. 

 The admission that Cremation is not illegal is something, 

 and the attempt to legalise it is more. But cremation at a 

 distance of 20 miles is useless. There is ample proof that its 

 proper performance within a city admits of no reasonable 

 objection. Persons living next door would not even know 

 that it was in progress, and in itself it is essentially purifying 

 as well as innocuous. 



Hj^giene demands the reduction to a minimum of the 

 time and distance between the death of the body and its 



