PRIVATE AND PROMISCUOUS CEMETERIES.
“Praises on tombs are trifles vainly spent,
A man’s good name is his best monument.”
_Epitaph on Pindar’s monument in St. Botolph’s, Aldersgate Street._
THERE are two chief senses in which the word “private” may be taken. It
denotes what belongs to a particular person, family, or institution
apart from the general public—thus we say a “private chapel,” a “private
drive,” and so on. It also means that which has been set into being by a
private individual, and which is, therefore, a private speculation. Into
these two classes I can divide the graveyards which are to be dealt with
in this chapter.
The Romans preserved the right of erecting tombs in their country
residences. Their very stringent laws prevented them from burying the
dead inside the cities (except certain classes of privileged persons),
but as long as the interment took place outside the walls, it seems, at
one time, to have mattered little where a tomb was set up. This practice
was put a stop to in the time of Duillius, and sepulchres were no longer
allowed in fields and private grounds, as it was found that the custom
was tending to diminish the area of land available for cultivation.
I think that such a practice was never general in London or the
surrounding district, but there are a few cases in which something of
the sort took place. In Wood’s “Ecclesiastical Antiquities” it is stated
that there was a cemetery at Somerset House, Strand, for the Catholic
members of Queen Henrietta Maria’s household (1626). It is certain that
the vaults under the palace chapel were used, as they were closed for
interments in 1777 (fourteen burials having taken place in fifty-seven
years), and if there was also a cemetery, the use of which was in this
way restricted, it may fairly be called private. It is possible however
that this may have been a part of the original churchyard of St. Mary le
Strand. The site has now disappeared, the present building of Somerset
House being far more extended than was the old one.
Another curious private ground, also used by Romanists, was the garden
of Hundsdon House, the French Embassy, in Blackfriars. In 1623 the floor
of a neighbouring Jesuit chapel gave way, and about 95 persons were
killed. Stow says that 20 bodies (of the poorer people) were buried on
the spot. Malcolm states that 44 were buried in the courtyard before the
Ambassador’s house, and 15 in his garden. Brayley’s version is that some
were buried in a burying-place “within the Spanish Ambassador’s house in
Holborn,” and that two great pits were dug, one in the forecourt of the
French Ambassador’s house, 18 feet by 12 feet, where 44 were interred,
the other in the garden behind, 12 feet by 8 feet. Wood gives the number
of those buried in these pits as 47. It was, at any rate, a curious and
summary way of disposing of the bodies of those who had so suddenly lost
their lives.
I only know of one burial-ground in London which is so strictly private
as to have only one grave in it. In Retreat Place, Hackney, a quiet
corner near the Unitarian Church, there is a row of twelve almshouses,
founded by Samuel Robinson in 1812, “for the widows of Dissenting
ministers professing Calvinistic doctrines.” In front of this
establishment is a neatly-kept grass plot, and in the centre of it is a
large altar tomb—not erected for the use of the ministers’ widows, but
containing the mortal remains of Samuel Robinson, who died in 1833, and
of his own widow who survived him three years. For my own part I should
prefer the enclosure without the grave, but perhaps the widows like to
be daily reminded of their benefactor.
[Illustration: BURIAL-GROUND IN NEWGATE GAOL.]
There are, no doubt, many private gardens and yards in London in which
burials have taken place, surreptitiously if not openly. Only recently
an undertaker was remanded for having been in the habit of temporarily
depositing the bodies of stillborn infants in his own back premises
until such time as there should be enough to make it worth while for him
to give them a decent burial. But, numerous as these instances may be,
it is difficult to get any record of them.
Convent burial-grounds are very private, but of these I have already
spoken in Chapter II. In Millbank Penitentiary a space, 432 square yards
in extent, was set aside as a graveyard, in which there was ordinarily
rather over one burial per month. There is a picture of it in Griffith’s
“Memorials of Millbank,” but no description. This particular plot of
ground is to be preserved as an open space when the new buildings are
erected on the site of the prison; it will probably belong to the London
School Board. Newgate burial-ground is still in use. It is a passage in
the prison, 10 feet wide and 85 feet long, in which are interred, with a
plentiful supply of quicklime, the bodies of those who are executed
within the walls. This reminds me of the gallows which stood for so many
years at the Tyburn turnpike, the site of which is still marked by a
stone in the Bayswater Road, a few yards west of the Marble Arch. Those
who were executed here (there were 24 in 1729) were buried on the spot,
and this extraordinary burial-ground was situated at the point now
occupied by the house at the corner of Edgware Road and Upper Bryanston
Street.[7] Mr. W. J. Loftie entirely discredits this story, and says
that one jawbone is all that was ever found to represent human remains
on this site. On their way to the gallows the poor criminals received a
present of a large bowl of ale, called St. Giles’ bowl, from the lazar
hospital of St. Giles, which was situated close to where the church now
stands. And thus they were refreshed on their last sad journey.
Footnote 7:
Smith’s “St. Marylebone.”
By the close of the last century the London churchyards, and the
additional burial-grounds provided by the parishes, were becoming so
overcrowded, that it occurred to some adventurers to start cemeteries as
private speculations; and it was greatly owing to their existence and to
their abuse that the agitation arose which finally led to the passing of
the “Act to amend the Laws concerning the Burial of the Dead in the
Metropolis,” under which the metropolitan burial-grounds were closed.
The speculation was found to be a successful one, and was imitated in
different parts of London, until by the year 1835 there must have been
at least fourteen burial-grounds in London carried on by private
persons, besides some additional chapels with vaults under them
conducted in the same way. A few of these grounds originated in
connection with neighbouring places of worship, but were subsequently
bought by private persons. In Central London there were (1) Spa Fields,
Clerkenwell; (2) Thomas’ burial-ground, Golden Lane; (3) the New City
Bunhill Fields, or the City of London burial-ground, Golden Lane. In
North London there was (4) the New or Little Bunhill Fields, Church
Street, Islington. In East London there were (5) Sheen’s burial-ground,
Whitechapel; (6) Victoria Park Cemetery, Bethnal Green; (7) the East
London Cemetery or Beaumont’s ground, Mile End; (8) Globe Fields
burial-ground, Mile End Old Town; (9) the North-east London Cemetery, or
Cambridge Heath burial-ground, or Peel Grove burial-ground, or Keldy’s
Ground, Bethnal Green; (10) Gibraltar Walk burial-ground, Bethnal Green;
(11) Ebenezer Chapel ground, Ratcliff Highway. And in South London (12)
Butler’s burial-ground, Horselydown, or St. John’s; (13) the New Bunhill
Fields, or Hoole and Martin’s ground, Deverell Street, New Kent Road;
and (14) a ground in Ewer Street, Southwark.
The charges made for interments in these places were generally slightly
lower than in the churchyards, in order to attract customers, and those
who officiated at the funerals were, in many cases, not ministers of
religion at all. In Butler’s burial-ground, for instance, the person who
read the burial service (of the Church of England) wore a surplice, but
he was merely an employé of the undertaker, who also acted as porter. In
Hoole and Martin’s ground a Mr. Thomas Jenner was employed to officiate
at funerals for £20 a year. He also read the burial service of the
Church of England, but he was by trade a shoemaker, or a patten-maker,
whose shop was close by. The owners of these private grounds were
naturally tempted to crowd them to excess, and it is impossible to think
of what took place in some of them without shuddering. No doubt
practices as vile, as unwholesome, and as irreverent were carried on in
many of the churchyards; but the over-crowding of the private grounds is
so associated with the idea of private gloating over private gains that
it is more repulsive.
One of the most notoriously offensive spots in London was Enon Chapel,
Clement’s Lane. The chapel was built, and the vaults under it were made,
as a speculation by a dissenting minister named Howse. The burial-fees
were small, and the place was resorted to by the poor, as many as nine
or ten burials often taking place on a Sunday afternoon. The space
available for coffins was, at the highest computation, 59 feet by 29
feet, with a depth of 6 feet, and no less than 20,000 coffins were
deposited there. In order to accomplish this herculean task it was the
common practice to burn the older coffins in the minister’s house, under
his copper and in his fireplaces. Between the coffins and the floor of
the chapel there was nothing but the boards. In time the effluvium in
the chapel became intolerable, and no one attended the services, but the
vaults were still used for interments, so that “more money was made from
the dead than from the living”—a state of affairs which existed in many
of the private burial-places of the metropolis. As I shall have to refer
again to the condition of these grounds in speaking of the closing of
graveyards in London, I will not enlarge upon it any further here,
except to quote from the evidence brought before the Select Committee
which sat in 1842 to consider the question of Interment in Towns,
respecting the Globe Fields burial-ground in Mile End, which is merely
one example out of sixty-five examinations.
William Miller, called in and examined.
“1615. CHAIRMAN. What is your occupation?—A jobbing, labouring man, when
I can get anything to do.”
“1616. Have you been a gravedigger in Globe Fields. Mile End?—Yes.”
“1617. Is that a private burying-ground?—Yes.”
“1618. To whom does it belong?—Mr. Thomas Tagg.”
“1620. Have many pits been dug in it for the depositing of bodies
previously interred?—Yes.”
“1621. Where did they come from?—Out of the coffins which were emptied
for others to go into the graves.”
“1623. Were the coffins chucked in with them?—No; they were broken up
and burnt.”
“1624. Were they bones, or bodies, that were interred?—Yes; the bones
and bodies as well.”
“1625. Were they entire, or in a state of decomposition?—Some were dry
bones, and some were perfect.”
“1627. What did you do with them?—Chucked them into the pit.”
“1628. What sort of pit?—A deep, square pit, about four feet wide and
seven or eight feet deep.”
“1629. How many bodies did you chuck in?—I cannot say, they were so
numerous; each pit would hold about a dozen.”
“1630. How many of these pits did you dig?—I suppose I dug a matter of
20 myself.”
“1632. How near to the surface of the earth did these dead bodies or
bones come?—Within about two feet.”
“1638. What is the size of this ground?—It is rather better than half an
acre.”
“1639. How many bodies are buried in that ground within a year?—I cannot
say; I suppose there are 14,000 have been buried in that ground.”
“1640. How long has it been open?—Since the year 1820.”
“1641. Do you recollect any circumstance which occurred there about the
month of October, 1839?—Yes.”
“1642. Will you state it to the Committee?—Some boys were at work there;
a policeman on the railroad happened to see them in the act of taking
some bones out of baskets, and got a policeman in the police force of
the metropolis, and sent him in and seized the boys with a bag of nails
and plates of the coffins, going away to sell them, and going to sell
the bones.”
“1643. To what purpose are the bones applied?—I do not know.”
“1644. What is done with the wood of the coffins?—Burnt for their own
private use.”
“1645. By whom?—By the sexton.”
“1648. MR. COWPER. Is it burnt in the sexton’s house?—Yes.”
“1649. SIR WILLIAM CLAY. What was done with the iron or metal handles of
the coffins?—They were burnt on the coffins when I was there, and were
thrown out among the ashes about the ground anywhere.”
“1653. MR. AINSWORTH. Who performs the burial service over the dead?—A
gentleman of the name of Cauch.”
“1654. Does he reside there?—No, he resides opposite.”
“1655. What is he?—I do not know that he is anything; he has formerly
been a shoemaker.”
“1656. Does he put on a gown when he buries the dead?—Yes, a surplice.”
“1657. What service does he read?—The regular Church service.”
“1665. CHAIRMAN. Were you in the habit of performing this grave-digging
without the use of spirits?—No; we were obliged to be half groggy to do
it, and we cheered one another and sung to one another.”
“1666. You found the work so disgusting you were obliged to be half
drunk?—Yes.”
And so on. Many of the revelations made to this committee are so
revolting that they are best forgotten. It is, perhaps, only fair to say
that this particular man’s evidence was contradicted by Mr. Thomas Tagg,
the owner of the ground, but it was subsequently corroborated by other
and disinterested witnesses.
[Illustration: PEEL GROVE BURIAL-GROUND, BETHNAL GREEN.]
[Illustration: VICTORIA PARK CEMETERY BEFORE BEING LAID OUT.]
The fate of these fourteen grounds has been a varied one. Thomas’s has
gone, and its site is occupied by a large building, chiefly a shoe
factory, on the north side of Playhouse Yard, and immediately to the
west of the church known as St. Mary’s Charterhouse. Sheen’s is now the
yard of Messrs. Fairclough, carters, off Commercial Road, and there are
some stables and sheds in it. It was, some few years back, a cooperage.
Peel Grove burial-ground is smaller than it was, and what is left is a
builder’s yard about an acre in extent, the remainder of the space
having been built upon. The very small ground by Ebenezer Chapel, near
St. George’s in the East, is also a timber-yard, the chapel itself
having long since fallen into disuse. Over half of the Globe Fields
ground the Great Eastern Railway runs; the remainder is a bare yard,
with several miserable tombstones in it and quantities of rubbish. It is
fast closed behind an iron gate of colossal proportions, and it daily
becomes more neglected and untidy. Little Bunhill Fields in Islington is
divided into several parts; one division belongs to the General Post
Office, and contains parcels-carts, &c., other pieces are let or sold as
builders’ yards or are lying vacant. New Bunhill Fields, near New Kent
Road, has been through many vicissitudes. It was very much overcrowded
with bodies, and in the vault under the chapel burials used to take
place “on lease,” _i.e._ £1 would be paid for a coffin to be deposited
for six months, after which time no inquiries were to be made. As soon
as the ground was closed for burials it became a timber-yard, and the
chapel in it was used as a saw-mill. Now the sawing goes on in an
adjoining shed, and the chapel belongs to the Salvation Army, the
graveyard being still covered with high stacks of timber. The City of
London ground, in Golden Lane, which was only used for about twenty
years, is divided. The part situated in the parish of St. Luke’s belongs
to Messrs. Sutton & Co., carriers, and is full of carts, the greater
part of it being roofed in. The part situated within the city boundary
forms the site of the City Mortuary and Coroner’s Court, with a
neatly-kept yard between the two buildings. Gibraltar Walk
burial-ground, Bethnal Green Road, has only had small slices cut off it
and doled out as yards, &c., for the surrounding houses. The main
portion is a neglected jungle, forming a sort of private garden to the
big house which opens on to it, and in which the owner of the ground
lives. In order to see Butler’s burial-ground it is necessary to go down
Coxon’s Place, Horselydown, where two yards will be found. One is a
small builder’s yard, with “Beware of the Dog” on the gate. Once I
doubted the existence of the dog, and pushed open this gate, but he was
there in full vigour, and I speedily fled. The adjoining yard, which is
much larger, is Messrs. Zurhoost’s cooperage, and is full of barrels.
There were vaults used for burials under three or four of the houses.
They can still be seen, and are now, apparently, dwelling-places for the
living. The graveyard in Ewer Street has disappeared under the London
Bridge and Charing Cross Railway.
The East London Cemetery, in Shandy Street, Mile End, is a recreation
ground chiefly for children. So is Spa Fields, Clerkenwell, which was
one of the most crowded burial-grounds in London, after having been a
fashionable tea-garden, and before being used as a volunteer
drill-ground. Both these grounds were secured and laid out by the
Metropolitan Public Gardens Association, and are maintained by the
London County Council. Such is also the history of Victoria Park
Cemetery, a space of 11½ acres, and by far the largest of the private
venture burial-grounds. In this ground it was stated that, on every
Sunday in the year 1856, 130 bodies were interred. After years of
negotiation and much difficulty, the Metropolitan Public Gardens
Association secured it, and converted it from a dreary waste of
crumbling tombstones and sinking graves into a most charming little park
for the people of Bethnal Green. It was opened by H.R.H. the Duke of
York in July, 1894, and the County Council maintains it, having
re-christened it Meath Gardens.
[Illustration: VICTORIA PARK CEMETERY WHEN FIRST LAID OUT.]
It need hardly be pointed out that in very few of the spaces I have just
described are any tombstones to be found. To a casual observer they are
utterly unrecognisable as burial-grounds, and it is many years since
such relics can have existed in them. When, for instance, a
burial-ground becomes a builder’s yard, tombstones are very much in the
way, and they are soon converted into paving-stones, Some years ago a
few inscriptions were still legible on the stones which paved the
passage to Spa Fields from Exmouth Street, but by this time even these
must be worn away. But if it is denied by the owners of these yards that
they are burial-grounds there is one method of proving it which soon
dispels all doubt, and that is by digging down into the soil. It will
not be necessary to make any deep excavation before the spade turns up
some earth mixed with human remains, which, once seen, are always
recognisable.
Archbishop Herring adopted this plan, as he was anxious to know if any
burials had taken place in what was always known as the “burying-ground”
of Lambeth Palace, on the north side of the chapel, by the site of the
smaller cloisters. In fact he had the whole space dug over, but without
success, for no signs of human remains were found; and it is probable
that the interments which took place within the palace were all under
the chapel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------