3. That it is not certain that by interment all the nitrogen becomes ammonia, and that probably a portion of this ammonia is temporarily taken out of circulation; and, finally,
4. That it is not proved that the nitrogen is completely set free during cremation. And even if this were so, its quantity, in comparison with that of the ammonia now yearly produced by the dry distillation and combustion of coal, is so small that the loss of it cannot be advanced as any really serious objection to the practice of cremation.
I must here add that the explanations given by Professor Franchimont are held to be perfectly satisfactory by seventeen professors and teachers of botany and chemistry in the Dutch universities, whose names are well known in the scientific world.
Students of agricultural chemistry, and others interested in the subject, should not fail to read Mr. Eassie’s excellent article on the asserted loss of ammonia caused by the cremation of bodies, in the London Sanitary Record of Jan. 18, 1878.
It must be remembered that all animals—from the smallest insect to the largest beast—excrete a great amount of ammonia during their lifetime, which passes off with the fecal matter, urine, and transpiration.
Besides, it cannot be denied that ammonia is formed spontaneously, during the great electrical processes which take place in nature, from the nitrogen and water of the atmosphere. The smoke that emanates from the chimneys of factories all over the world supplies more ammonia to the vegetable kingdom than the decomposing animal bodies ever could. And, finally, it must be kept in mind that we can generate ammonia artificially; therefore, should a dearth of ammonia ever occur, which is not very likely, this expedient would still be left to us.
There is no recorded evidence to show that any damage was done to the Egyptian vegetable world by the mummification which was carried on for thousands of years in the land of the Pharaohs. On the contrary, the country was in a more flourishing condition then than now.
The sentimental objection to cremation I have already treated of in a previous work; but since I have something to add to what I then remarked, I will revert to the topic.
The subject at first glance is revolting. To some persons there may be something in the idea of reducing one’s friends to ashes that is repulsive. Yet, when one makes a careful study of the question, that prejudice or repulsiveness wears away entirely, and makes way to a feeling that cremation is correct both in theory and practice. One should not listen to the emotions in a matter like this, but study incineration to be able to judge of it; objections founded on sentiment only are sure to be wrong.
If the general public knew, as a physician does, the many changes a body undergoes in the process of decomposition,—putrefaction and most disgusting changes,—I think a great deal of their objection to cremation would be removed. I fancy if people in general could see the ordinary process of decomposition, they would be in favor of the quicker and more scientific method of cremation.