Report of the Cremation Committee. 227 



iinal disposal. One weighty objection to burial is, that it 

 must be as far from the city as convenient, notwithstanding 

 the cruel inconvenience and expense to the mourning 

 relatives in the performance of their sacred duties. Their 

 strong claims to sympathy and consideration appear to have 

 been wholly ignored in the Frankston scheme. But in 

 Melbourne now, hundreds of pious mourners visit the graves 

 of their departed relatives weekly, and even more frequently, 

 to plant and carefully tend flowers around them. They 

 would be cruelly debarred from performing this pious duty 

 by the extra cost and time involved in frequent journeys, 

 even by railway, of 52 miles. Cremation would abolish this 

 difficulty entirely. Instead ot having to neglect these duties 

 altogether, or to travel, say weekly or daily to Frankston to 

 fulfil them, they would have the actual pure ashes them- 

 selves, in an elegant urn or other receptacle, in either the 

 mortuary chapel, or family household, where the^y could 

 fulfil their cares and soothe their feelings by daily viewing 

 them, and decking them with fresh flowers. 



As regards economy, compare a central City Crematory 

 and Mortuary Chapel, costing perhaps £2000 or £3000, and 

 2s. 6d. or 8s. worth of fuel, and a fee of a guinea, with a 

 Cemetery 26 miles oft', costing for land £15,000, fencing 

 £24,000, and several thousands more for a branch railway to 

 it. But these are of minor importance concerning the state 

 contribution only. The snlient point is, what will be the 

 charges for each funeral to bereaved mourners — the people ? 

 The deaths in Melbourne may now be taken at 10,000 

 yearly (10,412 in 1889, and 9,207 in 1890, Hayter), i.e., 25 

 to 28 daily. oPlO is sureh' a low average for ordinar}' 

 funerals now, and transport is always and necessarily, a 

 formidable extra ; and however performed, the 26 miles 

 cannot but add largely to the expense, falling upon the 

 unfortunate moarners in the shape of undertakers' bills, thus 

 augmented by at least 25 or 30 per cent. 



The fees, also, of unknown amount, would also fall upon 

 them, and to provide the projected embellishments upon the 

 scale hinted at, the fees must be anything but light. Even 

 supposing that the increase altogether might not exceed 

 50 per cent., £15 for each funeral, multiplied by 10,000, 

 would be at least £150,000 to be paid yearly by the i:>eo2:)le, 

 beside the contribution of the state. Cremation would per- 

 form the whole service for probably £1 Is. each, or £11,000 

 a year, in a few crematories costing perhaps £2000 each 



Q 2 



