342 Report from the Dissection Commitice. [Ocr. 
supposing the seizure of the unclaimed portion to be legalized ; and for 
the rest there can be no reasonable pretence, while other means less 
objectionable are left. 
No—the main supply of unclaimed bodies will come from the parish 
poor-houses. Returns have been made from 127 parishes of London, West- 
minster, and Southwark, or their immediate vicinity, by which it appears, 
that out of 3,744, who died in the work-houses alone, 3,103 were buried 
at the parish expense, and that of these 1,108 were unclaimed, that is, 
were utterly without connexions to inquire about them. Were the 
returns complete, the probability is that 2,000 may be calculated on, 
or not much short of 3,000 for the two seasons. But contenting our- 
selves with what is actually ascertained, here are at the very least 1,500 
bodies, or three for each of 500 students, without looking to any other 
source whatever. 
But is this source of supply, after all, less objectionable than the rest ? 
Why, what are the objections to it? No private feelings, it is obvious, 
can be outraged, for no relatives are known to exist; and such is the 
general interest taken by relatives in consigning the’ bodies of their 
friends to the grave, that, for the most part, we may safely conclude, if 
none present themselves, none exist, or none are within a knowledge of 
the case. No one, therefore, can complain that his feelings are disre- 
garded, for if he appears, the body ceases to fall within the class of the 
unclaimed ; and the dead, we suppose, in the absence of better evidence, 
know nothing about the matter. 
If the case be taken up on more general grounds—if it be supposed 
that people’s sympathies extend to absolute strangers—that a general 
and abstract repugnance exists to the very act of dissection, we venture 
to express our entire conviction that no such repugnance exists—that, on 
the contrary, generally, people, in this respect, care little what becomes 
of others, so that they do not belong to themselves—the common feeling 
with respect to others is, what matters what becomes of the senseless 
body? The practice of examining the dead is very general in -the hos- 
pitals—is known to be so—is rarely even objected to—nay is often soli- 
cited by friends, and witnessed by them—they are anxious to know the 
cause, and are sensible that can frequently be discovered only by actual 
inspection. And even among the higher classes, if prejudices did exist, 
they are fast wearing away. Sir Henry Halford, the great aristocrat 
doctor of the day, assures the Committee he should not be deterred from 
soliciting permission to examine, from any fear now of wounding the 
delicate feelings of the very nicest of the nobility. 
That the existing prejudices are directed not against dissection, but 
against exhumation and publicity, is manifest from a multitude of facts. 
The hospitals, which have dissecting schools connected with them, are 
not the less frequented since the erection of them ; on the contrary, those 
very hospitals are of the highest repute. The Irish, whose prejudices 
are conceived to be strongest, seem, after waking the dead, in reality, to 
care little what becomes of them. No horror is expressed at the intro- 
duction of dead bodies in Windmill-street, for instance, or anywhere in 
the neighbourhood of anatomical schools, where the people are accus- 
tomed to the sight. There is no evidence, in short, that any body cares 
about dissection, except in the case of relatives ; and as to relatives even, 
they do not object to examination, nor would they to dissection, if they 
knew better what was meant, or were convinced of the advantage to be 
derived from it to the living. At Dublin, in particular, Mr. Crompton, 
