97 
PARK AND 
will be a large number of adherents won against the propo- 
sition of wholesale crypt burial. Cemetery officials who 
want to open a campaign against the promoters in their 
locality, can do no better than to reprint and circulate 
these two articles as soon as the mausoleum promoters ap- 
pear in their vicinity and begin the circulation of their 
literature. 
As an evidence that the public is open to argument, two 
campaigns have just been started against the community 
mausoleum in Princeton, 111., and in Rockford, 111. 
In Rockford, a vigorous fight against the proposed in- 
stitution is being made by residents of the North End, 
where the promoters have purchased land. H. B. Sulli- 
van, a florist, is one of the leaders in a movement to pre- 
vent the Rockford Mausoleum Company, of which W. A. 
Merrifield is secretary and general manager, from erect- 
ing the proposed building. 
Four petitions were put into circulation, asking resi- 
dents of the North End to sign the protest against the 
mausoleum. It is reported that the papers are being rap- 
idly signed. The intention is to ask the city to restrain 
the local company in its plans. Should the petitions re- 
ceive sufficient signatures in time, the city council will 
be asked to take action. 
Mr. Sullivan stated that the objection is based on the 
probable decrease in real estate values which might follow 
the construction of a building for the reception of human 
remains. 
In Princeton, 111., an attempt on the part of the trustees 
of Oakland cemetery to deliver eighteen choice burial 
lots to the Bureau County Mausoleum Company for $1,000 
was foiled at a special meeting of the city council through 
the efforts of Alderman H. W. Hanson, who led the at- 
tack upon the proposed deal and in a minority report, 
PHOTOS BY C. M. WELLS, ALEDO, ILL. 
CRACK BETWEEN PIER AND WALL OF COMMUNITY 
MAUSOLEUM AT DECATUR, ILL. 
CEMETERY. 
made a stinging exposure of the mausoleum proposition 
which he characterized as a scheme to do the citizens of 
Princeton out of about $20,000. 
The resolution of the Cemetery trustees giving the 
details of the terms with the mausoleum people was as 
follows: 
‘‘That we the Cemetery trustees recommend the following contract 
and that the resolution of the city council resolving that a plot of 
ground 135 feet wide and 57 feet in depth, as described by lots and 
plots in contract attached hereto, be deeded to the Bureau County 
Mausoleum Company, they the Bureau County Mausoleum Co. 
to fulfill their part and the city of Princeton theirs, of the contract, 
to-wit: 
‘‘That the Bureau County Mausoleum Co. will pay either in cash 
or negotiable paper within sixty days of the acceptance of contract 
by the city of Princeton to deed to the Bureau County Mausoleum 
Co. the site requested by them and herein mentioned for the sum 
of $1,000. The Mausoleum Co. to have permanent roadway built, 
11 feet wide with a concrete walk 4 feet wide, said roadway to be 
macadam road leading to the main road. 
“Said mausoleum shall conform in all respects to the general 
plans and specifications now on file with the cemetery trustees 
which is known as a Masoleum Castalia. 
“The outer walls of the mausoleum shall be built of smooth 
surfaced Bedford stone or patent Monolithic Block Pressed, made of 
pure white cement and sand. 
“Foundation to be at least 5 feet deep according to plans and 
specifications. The Bureau County Mausoleum Co. also to give the 
permanent use of Chapel for which fees may be charged to all 
except tomb owners in the building. For sealing of tombs a charge 
of $5.00 is made, which in the event of the superintendent of ceme- 
tery or sexton performing this work, shall be used by them, in as 
far as the upkeep of the grounds around the mausoleum are con- 
cerned.” 
Alderman Hanson after calling attention to the fact 
that the land was valued at $1,770, went on to argue 
against the mausoleum proposition as follows: 
"I also object to the placing of this mausoleum in blocks number 
80 and 73, which I consider the best site in the new park, and feel 
that we can find two other blocks farther south, which will not 
force us to sell lots back of the Mausoleum, for I most earnestly 
believe that any lot in the rear or back of this building cannot be 
sold at the appraised value. The cemetery will therefore suffer 
as a consequence. 
"I am still further opposed to the closing of one of the im- 
portant driveways, especially so close to the main road, which I am 
informed is only about 150 feet from the fence. This establishes a 
bad precedent, which I think may work an injury in the future. 
“An item that my attention has been called to, and a very im- 
portant item to the cemetery is this: 
“The superintendent of cemetery collects $4 for each grave that 
is dug, which money is turned into the cemetery fund, there is a 
revenue of $1,200 for the 300 crypts that will be in this mausoleum, 
besides we will be cutting off the sale of at least 75 to 100 ceme- 
tery lots, which will mean that our cemetery will suffer through 
this transaction. 
“These three objections are what I base my judgment on, and are 
the reason why I am opposed to the same. 
"1 wish to give you some information which I have secured from 
the proceedings of the National Cemetery Superintendents held in 
Philadelphia, September, 1911. I have their report here, and if 
anyone wishes to have it read, we can do so. This report treats 
on the durability and the sanitary conditions of all mausoleums 
that their committee visited. I have here some actual photographs 
of the mausoleum at Aurora, or at the village of Montgomery, 
which shows cracks on the outer wall of their building which was 
dedicated In June, 1910. I contend that if the outer wall cracks, 
that the inner or tomb part will do the same and the moment it 
does, the gases and odors will escape, which will make it a detri- 
ment to the health of the community. 
“If the building, in less than two years has had to have another 
roof put on, who is to maintain it, and how, on the interest of a 
$1,500 fund? What will be the results in twenty-five years from 
now, when most of the owners of the crypts are dead or have 
moved away? 
“The last point to which I wish to call your attention, is that I 
believe it a promotion scheme pure and simple, and figure that 300 
crypts selling at $150 each, will net $45,000. Taking their figures 
and making them high enough, the building costing $18,000, the 
cemetery lots, $1,000 and $6,000 for selling the crypts, makes a 
total expenditure of $25,000. This deducted from the total $45,000, 
leaves a total of $20,000 profit. 
“If the mausoleum is so good a thing, why should not the ceme- 
tery control and secure the profit?” 
Details of the arrangements to be made for the care 
and maintenance of the building were thrashed out at 
length resulting in a display of warm feeling. At the 
request of Alderman Moseley, a portion of the report of 
