During November, 1989 in Louisville, Kentucky, the media focus is one the most historic cemeteries in the state, Eastern Cemetery. According to the New York Times and University of Louisville archeologist, Philip DiBlasi, the shocking news was the fact that the Louisville Crematory and Cemetery Inc. allowed the remains of up to 48,000 people to be buried in graves that were already occupied by bodies (Associated Press; DiBlasi). DiBlasi states that some graves contained the remains of as many as six people. In addition, graves that contained the remains of three or four were the most common (qtd. in Associated Press). This instance is an extreme case showing the abuse of cemeteries. Many archaeologists, including Philip DiBlasi, argue that every day there are cemeteries that are being misused and even forgotten due to modern construction or just not being taken care of in our communities (DiBlasi). Even more so, cemeteries become simply abandoned. Government officials with plans to use the land that have cemeteries will probably suggest otherwise and argue that these forgotten cemeteries are simply that, so there is no need to protect them. However, my point is not that we should watch our cemeteries become destroyed with abuse, but that we should respect the cemeteries and the historic and educational importance associated with them through being responsible and preserving the traditions. Through academic research, specific circumstances, and personal observations, I will argue that cemeteries are an important part of our communities and the appropriate action must be taken to take care of them to preserve the traditions they provide.
To address the cemeteries and to understand what condition the cemeteries should be in, I will first describe the federal and state laws that can be applied to determine this. Secondly, I will apply the different situations from individual cemeteries that display wrong doing based on the laws. By doing this, the situations will show that action needs to be taken to preserve cemeteries. Thirdly, I will give the opposition of preserving historically essential cemeteries from government officials with their argument. And lastly, I will give the solution to the neglected cemetery problem and conclude my paper.
The laws that determine how cemeteries should be taken care of are mandated federally and on the state level. On the federal level, the laws for cemeteries can be attributed to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of November 16, 1990 (United States). The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 required that “federal agencies give proper consideration to historic and cultural properties in any actions they may take” which includes cemeteries (Parris 3). This act is significant to apply to cemeteries because it shows that cemeteries offer benefits to our communities by federally mandating that they be protected. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in 1990 is “the primary federal legislation pertaining to graves and human remains in archaeological contexts” (Federal Laws and Acts). This act specifically supports the fact that the remains of individuals are sacred artifacts, and therefore need to be treated as so.
Regarding the state laws for cemeteries, according to Jack Trope and Walter Echohawk, “Basic values, in respect to the dead, are strictly protected in all fifty states, and the District of Columbia, by statutes that comprehensively regulate cemeteries and protect graves from vandalism and desecration” (178). Specifically in Kentucky, there are Kentucky Revised Statues, abbreviated as KRS, that mandate the laws associated with the state cemeteries. These laws are what mandate the level to which government officials and citizens are required to hold their cemeteries to in their communities.
With an understanding to what laws cemeteries are held to, you can now understand the specific instances where these laws have been broken. Because federal and state laws have been broken, these occurrences at individual cemeteries will show appreciation for the argument that there is a need to preserve our cemeteries. According to Trope and Echohawk, “Unfortunately, the legal protections – that most citizens take for granted – have failed to take care of the dead,” which supports the fact that these laws have been broken and there are cemeteries that prove this fact (178).
Based on KRS 525.120 in the state of Kentucky, the statue defines when there is abuse to corpse. This abuse can occur when, “a person … intentionally treats a corpse in a way that would outrage ordinary family sensibilities … and also be guilty of abuse of a corpse if that person enters into a contract … and then deliberately fails” (Kentucky Cemetery Laws). KRS 525.120 has been unlawfully broken in the instance before mentioned of Eastern Cemetery in Louisville, Kentucky. Louisville Crematory and Cemetery Inc. morbidly disregarded this statute when they purposely reused graves that already were occupied in Eastern Cemetery (DiBlasi). By doing so, Louisville Crematory and Cemetery Inc. violated the statue because they “outrage[d] ordinary family sensibilities” by burying other bodies in their loved ones’ graves and also, failed to uphold their contract because of the fact mass burial occurred (Kentucky Cemetery Laws).
 | |||
| Crypt in Eastern Cemetery with obvious vandalism. (Holland) |
Eastern Cemetery has also been abused in relation to KRS 525.115 which covers the subject of violating graves. It states, “A person is guilty of violating graves when he intentionally mutilates the graves, monuments, fences, shrubbery, ornaments, grounds, or buildings in or enclosing any cemetery or place of sepulture” (Kentucky Cemetery Laws). Because Eastern Cemetery has not been taken care of, it has been subject to vandalism. This vandalism goes against KRS 525.115 because in 2001, the cemetery’s walk in crypt was discovered to be disturbed, where individuals had broken in, dumped people’s sacred cremated remains, and taken the copper urns as scrap metal for money (DiBlasi). University of Louisville archeologist Philip DiBlasi was outraged at this vandalism, and he retained a court order to seize what was left of the copper urns and cremated remains to be stored in his laboratory so that they would no longer be tampered with by others (DiBlasi).
On a broader basis, the state of Kentucky is not alone with the occurrences of abused cemeteries. These atrocities have occurred all over the United States. The sheer multitude of incidents that have occurred scream that a call for action is needed for preservation. There are some particular instances that are worth mentioning. In 1996, Rosemont Cemetery, of Newark, New Jersey, “admitted to burying people under sidewalks, reclaiming previously sold graves, and moving grave markers” (Davis). In 2005, Grandview Memorial Gardens of Madisonville, Indiana began fighting many lawsuits due to, “improper drainage at the Cemetery, resulting in such issues as water accumulating in the graves and flooded lawn crypts” along with three million dollars missing from the cemetery’s trust fund (Leathermon v. Grandview Memorial Gardens). The Leathermon v. Grandview Memorial Gardens lawsuit is still being fought to this day by the outraged families (DiBlasi). In addition, in the state of Texas, there is desecration often from the looting of unmarked Indian burial sites. According to Harris and Soucy, “The state currently has no protection of these sites, which are often singled out for looting and destruction as if Indians were subhuman creatures whose graves are of little consequence” (25). A specific group that has been subject to a large number of lootings in Texas is the Caddo Indians and their cemeteries (Nelson and Perrtula, 77). They “have been repeatedly damaged and destroyed by looters and grave robbers since at least the early 1900’s” with the amount that has been looted “numbering in the hundreds of cemeteries and thousands of graves” (78). The alarming statement that is made is that “there is no way to conceive of the vast body of valuable scientific and cultural information that has been lost” (79). This shows that there is much value to be placed on cemeteries because of the historical and educational information that they provide. By not protecting our cemeteries, especially our prehistoric grave sites, we are irresponsibly allowing these deplorable actions to continue to occur. Communities need to stand together to preserve the cemeteries’ traditions and protect the rights of those who have passed on.
The opposition to my argument that cemeteries need to be preserved can be attributed to government officials who would like to use the land that the cemeteries are on for their own wants and needs. They would justify their opposition by stating that because the cemetery land is not used anymore, due to the fact there are no burials taking place in the cemetery, shows that it is not as important, and the land has a better use for their community. However, these officials completely disregard the sanctity of cemeteries and the cemeteries’ historical and educational values. This scenario can be applied to the Central State Hospital Cemetery on the grounds of E.P. “Tom” Sawyer State Park in Louisville, KY. When the Central State Hospital transferred location to another part of Louisville, the state decided that it should be turned into a state park, which they named E.P. “Tom” Sawyer State Park in 1971 (E.P. “Tom” Sawyer State Park). Needless to say, there was a cemetery from the hospital residents that had passed away during their stay at the facility. This is a perfect example of the government disregarding the law and cemetery’s sacredness. Referring to KRS 381.690, it says that the state must protect burial grounds from being used as a public park (Kentucky Cemetery Laws). Because the Central State Hospital Cemetery and land surrounding it was made into a Kentucky state park, the government officials show that there is a complete neglect from the law and what is supposed to occur.
 | |||
|
Based on my personal observations, the Central State Hospital Cemetery goes unnoticed to the Tom Sawyer Park passerby. While it is marked off by a fence, this fence is dilapidated and the area of the cemetery is overgrown. Furthermore, there are even headstones strewn under a tree, misplaced from the graves to which they belong. The fact that the cemetery is in such disrepair goes against KRS 381.697, which states that the cemetery will be “free of growth of weeds, free from accumulated debris, displaced tombstones, or other signs and indication of vandalism or gross neglect” (Kentucky Cemetery Laws). When the Department of Kentucky Parks was contacted about the lawfulness of creating a state park from the Central State Hospital Cemetery, the response was that “The area containing the cemetery is fenced and mowed on a regular basis. There is nothing that would preclude the use of the remaining acreage as a park” (Devine). Upon further questioning about what that statement actually means, there has yet to be a response. You have to infer that the state government has justified their use of the land as a state park because the officials have fenced in the cemetery in which the fence is currently falling down, and the area is mowed on a regular basis, even though it is actually very much overgrown. Apparently, there is some miscommunication over the definition of a proper fence and how long a regular basis can be measured. Therefore, not only has the government turned land from the cemetery into a state park, but also there is a mismanagement of the property. Now having just argued that government officials are incorrect in opposing cemeteries and the historical importance that their land holds, let us turn our attention to the solution that will support the preservation of the disrespected cemeteries.
Based on research, I suggest that the communities of these cemeteries attempt to become proactive towards taking care of the graves. The goal is to preserve the cemetery sites because of the historical and educational information that the cemeteries provide. By doing so, the cemeteries will not become forgotten or abandoned. This can be done through proper maintenance and an initiative from the citizens in the community, which includes support from the local and state government. Focusing back into the state of Kentucky, in 2001, a group called the Task Force on the Preservation of Kentucky Cemeteries was “formed out of a demand for action caused by the deplorable conditions of far too many of [cemeteries’] sacred grounds in the state (Meeks). Many of these deplorable conditions are in reference to the three cemeteries owned by Louisville Cemetery and Crematory Inc.; Eastern, Greenwood, and Schardein (Final Report). From this, they created a “Final Report” that was submitted to the Kentucky Attorney General which outlined the cemeteries in the state that needed the most help, what specifically needed to be changed, and how the changes should occur (Final Report). This action by the state of Kentucky, by creating this committee, shows that initiative can occur for the preservation of cemeteries.
 | ||
| One of the cemeteries observed by the Task Force needing help in KY due to bad irrigation. (Task Force) |
The statistics that were accounted for in the “Final Report” by the task force were quite alarming. Of all the cemeteries in Kentucky, 62% would categorize themselves as “neglected” and another 62% were considered to be “abandoned” (Final Report). Due to the status of the cemeteries, 83% of them needed “additional maintenance” to help solve their disrepair (Final Report). These facts show that the many problems of cemeteries being defined as abused and neglected have to be changed.
As stated by Rep. Reginald Meeks, the co-chair of the task force committee, “as result of the findings [from the Task Force], the Attorney General's office became much more focused on attacking the problem and providing relief for Kentucky families; the legislature undertook legislative reform; and a fund was established in the Dept. of Local Government for the support of cemeteries across the state” (Meeks).
While the “Final Report” initiative has not fixed the past actions of the state, it was a step in the right direction. If more states can begin the same plan, to help restore and protect their cemeteries, there will be a positive change in the status of our abused cemeteries throughout the country. Communities with suffering cemeteries need to stand together, determine what the cemeteries need help for preservation, verify those who are responsible for the cemeteries, and establish funds that can aid the cemeteries in rectifying their situation. The preservation of cemeteries places its historical and educational importance to historians, family members, genealogists, preservationists (Final Report). By working together, the cemeteries can be taken care of for many years to come, but there must be constant attention paid by all parts.
In conclusion, through showing that cemeteries are protected by the federal and state laws, there is a level to which the government must hold their cemeteries. However, this has not prevented cemeteries from becoming abused. There is a sufficient call to action to protect and preserve our cemeteries because of the disrespect shown to them such as mass burial, overgrowth, vandalism, and in general, complete disregard of the laws. The solution is to become proactive through proper maintenance and an initiate from the citizens in the community. By successfully taking charge of these abused cemeteries through constant vigilance, the cemeteries’ historical traditions can be preserved for many years to come.
Works Cited
Davis, Kristin. "`Now we know why the grass never grew...They Never Stopped Digging.'." Kiplinger's Personal Finance Magazine 53.5 (1999): 78.Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 21 July 2011.
Devine, Sam. "Re: E.P Sawyer." Message to the author. 26 July 2011. E-mail.
DiBlasi, Philip. Personal interview. 27 June 2011.
DiBlasi, Philip. “Re: Cemetery Lawsuits.” Message to the author. 18 July 2011. E-mail.
“E.P. Tom Sawyer State Park”. parks.ky.gov. Kentucky State Parks, 2011. Web. 20 July 2011.
"Federal Laws and Acts Protecting Burial Sites”. portal.state.pa.us. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 2011. Web. 20 July 2011.
“Final Report.” fayettecocemeteries.org. Task Force on the Preservation of Kentucky Cemeteries, 2001. Web. 21 July 2011.
Harris, Helen L., and Ruth H. Soucy. "Bridging the Gap: A Perspective From Two Generations." Texas Journal on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights 4.1 (1998): 25.Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 15 July 2011.
Holland, Jeffery. "Eastern cemetery crpyt". Photograph. Unusual Kentucky, 2009. Web. 22 July 2011.
“Kentucky Cemetery Laws”. fayettecocemeteries.org. Fayette Co. Cemeteries. 6 February 2009. Web. 21 July 2011.
“Leathermon v. Grandview Memorial Gardens”. findacase.com. LRC, Inc. 2011. Web. 21 July 2011.
Meeks, Reginald. "Re: Task Force on the Preservation of Kentucky Cemeteries" Message to the author. 28 July 2011. E-mail.
Parris, Thomas A. "Historic Preservation." Environment 46.8 (2004): 3. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 28 July 2011.
Perttula, Timothy K., and Bo Nelson. "The Looting of Prehistoric Caddo Indian Cemeteries in Northeast Texas." Texas Journal on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights 4.1 (1998): 77. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 22 July 2011.
Press, Associated. "Thousands Buried in Old Graves, Investigators in Kentucky Report." New York Times 28 November 1989. Web. 20 Jul 2011.
Task Force for the Preservation of Kentucky Cemeteries. "Flooded cemetery." Photograph. Final Report. 2001. Web. 22 July 2011.
Trope, Jack and Walter Echohawk. “The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act: Background and Legislative History.” Readings in American Indian Law: Recalling the Rhythm of Survival. Ed. Jo Carrillo. Philadelphia, PA: Temple UP, 1998. 178-187. Print.
United States. Cong. Senate. National Historic Preservation Act. 89th Cong., 1st sess. S 3035. Washington: GPO, 1966. Print.
United States. Cong. Senate. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. 101st Cong., 1st sess. S 3048. Washington: GPO, 1990. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment