The Monument to William
Searching on-line, or reading books concerning the Davenport Brothers, one finds variations on the following statement:-
"In honor of his brother, Ira ordered a magnificent memorial for him on which was carved a representation of their ropes, cabinet and other séance props. William had died in Australia and cemetery officials in Sydney would not allow the monument within the cemetery grounds. It was placed outside instead."
This statement raises a number of immediate issues. Firstly, William's gravesite is not a 'magnificent' memorial. It is a simple horizontal stone inscribed with text (the upright headstone visible in the Houdini photographs is from a neighbouring grave and does not form part of the Davenport grave.) Furthermore, there is no engraving of ropes, bells, cabinets or anything else on the stone. Although the text is worn, it is still sufficiently clear to be seen; no other engraving marks are remotely visible.
So the question arises, is this statement correct? Was there a 'monument', possibly separate to his gravestone, erected in William's honour, and if so, where is it located?
Primary Sources and Some Clues
In an attempt to trace primary sources for the claims about the monument, the two most likely sources are the website at www.prairieghosts.com, from which it appears that most other online article have based their remarks. The site's author, Troy Taylor, advises that his source was Rosemary Ellen Guiley, who authored the "Encyclopedia of Ghosts and Spirits". Unfortunately I have been unable to make further headway in tracking this to its source.
Another online reference comes from William George Alma, Australian magic historian, whose extensive collection of research is held at the State Library of Victoria. The S.L.V searchable image website returns many interesting images of the Davenports, along with a biography which repeats the 'monument' story, (see, for instance, http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/miscpics/gid/slv-pic-aab12631/1/mp015953 ) but examination of the files in the Alma Conjuring Collection reveals no comments about the monument, let alone any clues to the primary source. Neither do Alma's writings in his magazine, the "Magic Circle Mirror" (8).
Dispute with the Rookwood Trustees
Without a confirmed source, the story of the engraved monument cannot be confirmed. Neither can the statement that the monument was placed outside the grounds of Rookwood Cemetery which, starting as a 200 acre site in 1862, has grown to become the largest cemetery in the Southern Hemisphere.
However, there is a document which gives us some clues, if not a final answer, to the mystery of the Davenport monument. In "Cemeteries in Nineteenth-century New South Wales: Landscapes of Memory and Identity" (9), author Lisa Anne Murray has this to say about the authority of cemetery trustees at Rookwood Cemetery :-
The decisions of cemetery trustees, in particular their refusal to entertain monuments which challenged the regulations, created precedents or 'subverted uniformity', illustrate how the desire to ensure 'chaste' and 'decent' monuments degenerated into a pedantic curtailing of designs and reflects the inherent conservatism of the religious bodies that controlled the cemetery trusts.
Each denomination had its own ideas about what was appropriate in the eyes of God. This reflected the theology and social composition of the various Churches, as well as the stylistic debate and trustees' ideas of 'taste' and 'uniformity'. Hence it is possible to discern distinctions in the design and inscriptions of monuments amongst the various religious groups. Roman Catholic doctrine tailored inscriptions, encouraging phrases such as 'pray for the soul of …', 'Gloria in excelsis deo', 'Jesus have mercy on their soul' and 'requiescat in pace'.
Attempts by the Church of England Trustees in Rookwood Necropolis to exclude such popish tendencies were not always successful. In 1877 the Church of England Trustees initially rejected Mrs Davenport's proposal for a family monument because the inscription was 'improper'. The Trustees asserted that in conjunction with the monument, the inscription represented 'Spiritism', and 'May he rest in peace' was a prayer for the dead. The Church of England Trustees clearly wanted no hint of popery amongst its monuments. So incensed was Mrs Davenport that she wrote to the Minister of Lands complaining about the rejection. The Attorney General advised the board of trustees that a ruling in 1838 concerning a tombstone inscription meant that the Trustees had to accept Mrs Davenport's inscription.
[18 & 20 September 1877. Anglican Trustees' Minute Book, Rookwood Necropolis, 1868-1894 (vol.1) Anglican Office, Rookwood Necropolis]
While these comments shed much valuable light on the tale, and confirm that there was, indeed, a dispute concerning the grave, it does not entirely rule out the possibility that a separate engraved memorial was erected somewhere; and the correspondence was undertaken by Mrs Davenport, not by William's brother, Ira.
Curiously, a searchable CD of Rookwood grave inscriptions does list the known Davenport grave, but it fails to quote the poem, and also omits the phrase "may he rest in peace"; the same Popish phrase objected to by the Trustees. (10)
Once again, gaining access to primary sources is currently proving very difficult. Approaches to the Anglican Office at Rookwood have been met with statements to the effect that the Trustees books, if indeed they are still held at the office, would not be made available to members of the public (one assumes author Lisa Anne Murray did not fall into this category!). The possibility that Ministerial correspondence still exists will require further investigation via the State Records Office of NSW.
Further Light Shed on the Dispute
Possibly the most detailed information about the monument dispute came to light in July 2010, with the location of the following article from the Sydney Morning Herald of September 19, 1877. (11) It may be tantalising to think that, somewhere in Sydney, is another monument to one of the most influential ghost-raisers of the nineteenth century; however this article probably gives the clearest indication that appropriate pressure was placed upon the trustees of the Necropolis and Mrs. Davenport finally had her way, resulting in the gravestone we know today. If that is the case, stories of the stonework being engraved with anything but text are likely to be erroneous.
Sydney Morning Herald, Wednesday 19 September 1877
(also a near-identical report in Maitland Mercury, 22/9/1877).
Report from New South Wales Parliament:-
…. Adjournment - Burial of the late W.H.H. Davenport
Cries of "Adjourn" being made by several hon. Members, Sir John Robertson moved "That this House do now adjourn."
Mr Buchanan wished to take advantage of this motion to bring under the notice of the House and the public, what he considered a very scandalous business, which called for public condemnation. He believed that, a short time ago, Mr. William Henry Harrison Davenport, one of the Davenport Brothers, died in Sydney and was buried in the Church of England portion of the Necropolis. His widow naturally proposed to erect a tombstone over his grave. She proposed further to inscribe on the tombstone the line "May he rest in peace and the following verse, written by the deceased's older brother, Mr. Ira Davenport. -
"Dear brother I would learn from thee,
And hasten to partake thy bliss;
To thy world O welcome me,
As first I welcomed thee to this."
In accordance with the regulations of the cemetery, Mrs. Davenport submitted these lines to Mr. S. H. Pearce, one of the trustees, who, with great vulgarity and rudeness, struck his pen through them, ejaculating, "We can't allow this; we can't have any prayers for the dead" and in an offensive and determined manner refused to allow the widow to exercise her rights over her own property. Mrs. Davenport wrote to the Colonial Secretary detailing these circumstances. Not receiving any reply she again addressed the Colonial Secretary, pointing out that on a tombstone in the cemetery there was this line, "May he rest in peace" and that on another there was a verse similar to that which Mr. Ira Davenport wished to have place on his brother's tombstone. In the meantime the matter came under the notice of the Attorney-General who, in a memorandum which he addressed to the Colonial Secretary, and which did him infinite credit, characterised Mr. Pearce's conduct as unwarrantable, and urged that Mrs. Davenport should have the permission she asked for granted without delay.
The next letter in the correspondence was issued from the Lands Office, reciprocating the sentiments of the Attorney-General, and condemning the conduct of Mr. Pearce. Then Mrs. Davenport again addressed Mr. Pearce, asking him to reconsider his decision with regard to the matter. In reply to that, Mr. Pearce wrote acknowledging the receipt of Mrs. Davenport's letter, and stating that the original plans and documents must be again submitted to him before he could reconsider his decision as to what he had previously decided was improper. He [ ie, Buchanan] contended that such conduct on the part of Mr. Pearce was intolerable, and that Mrs. Davenport should have been approached with sympathy and respect. He could not find words sufficiently strong to express his opinion of the conduct of this man Pearce.
The motion was agreed to, and the House adjourned at twnty-three minutes to six o'clock until 4 o'clock this day (Wednesday).
|
