The following recommendation from a well-known physician and surgeon appears in London, p. 613, September 27, 1894:—
“Coroners’ Courts and Mortuaries,” a paper read at the Hygiene Congress at Buda Pesth, by W. J. Collins, M.D., M.S., B.Sc., D.P.H. (Lond.), L.C.C.
“I therefore hold that every inducement should be held out to the poor by local authorities, by the provision of decent, suitable, and attractive mortuaries, to allow their dead to be removed from danger to the living to a place where sentiment shall be respected and sanitation satisfied.”
THE UTILITY OF MORTUARIES.
During the discussion on Premature Burials in the press, the erection of mortuaries (chambres mortuaires d’attente) has been objected to (1) on the ground of expense to the rate-payers; and (2) because the results by way of resuscitation of those constructed in Germany have not justified the cost of their erection and maintenance, and that if they had not already been in existence they would not now, it is said, be established. The most recent investigations on this subject have been made by Monsieur B. Gaubert, the results of which appear in his work, “Les Chambres Mortuaires d’Attente,” a volume of 308 pages, published in Paris, 1895. The author shows by the citation of facts that both in France and Germany numerous cases of resuscitation of persons certified as dead, and deposited in mortuaries, in spite of many drawbacks connected with their management, have occurred, and that their continuance is amply justified on the ground of utility. In the report of the Municipal Council of Paris for 1880, No. 174, p. 84, is a letter from THE MAYOR OF MUNICH’S OPINION. Herr Ehrhart, Mayor of Munich, May 2, 1880, who says:—“The lengthy period during which these establishments have been utilised, the order which has always prevailed, the manner in which the remains are disposed and adorned, the resuscitation of some who were believed to be dead, have all contributed to remove any sentimental objections to these establishments. The bodies are transported to the Leichenhäuser twelve hours after death, without the least opposition on the part of the relatives.” The expense of these institutions would, no doubt, in the aggregate be a considerable sum, but not nearly so large as that voted for the erection and maintenance of public libraries, now so common; but in the presence of so serious and real a danger as that of living burial, to which any of us is liable, it is hardly worth considering. For peace of mind the cost of such insurance would be cheerfully paid by thousands, and ought to be provided for the poor and for those who would in time come to value it. This is a matter that might appropriately be taken up by the County, District, and Parish Councils and Boards of Guardians, under the powers granted to them by the Local Government Act of 1894.
Dr. Josat, in his treatise “De la mort et de ses caractères,” shows by numerous arguments and examples that, as there is an interval or condition provided by nature between disease and health known as convalescence, and the transition between the one and the other is preceded by a variety of phenomena known as a crisis, so there is an interval between the termination of a fatal malady and real death (erroneously described as the agony), the symptoms which denote intermediate or apparent death. But while the result of an error may be of little moment in the first case, it may in the other become disastrous, by abandoning the dying before absolute death. It is during this interval, between (so called) death agony and absolute death, which sometimes has been known to last a week, that the transfer to a suitable mortuary should be made.
The following may be cited as typical illustrations of the utility of mortuaries in discovering the existence of life after apparent death.
H. L. Kerthomas in “Dernières Considérations sur les Inhumations Précipitées,” Lille, 1852, p. 17, relates that—
AND CASES OF RESUSCITATION.