Mount Auburn Cemetery

187

Nov^r 29 [186]4

Capt. D.L. Winsor,

Dear Sir,

Mr W^m M. Lathrop called in this P.M. and says he thinks he gave you an order for both posting & grading lots 3363 & 3364, Acanthus P. rear of 1833 & 1856. He talked over the size of the posts, & thinks he signed his name to the order book. -- If he is in error, please inform me, and I will have him give the proper order. -- He would like to have the grading done this season, if not too late: at all events, set the posts.

As it will probably be a day or two before the surveyors get out to you, I think it will be well for you to set as many of the posts to the lots of delinquent proprietors as possible: -- and their survey would then be the more complete. I subjoin a list of ^^all the earlier lots contained on the list shown you, remaining without bounds. --

?	3027	Magnolia	630 f.	Hunt.
	3081	"
	3213	Willow	300	G. Tufts
	3215	Lawn	400	Potter
	3224	Rosebay	440	Livermore
{	3232	Lime	} 250	Walker
{	3233	"	} 250	Walker
(	3320	Rosebay	300	Holmes
(	3321	"	300	Holmes
{	3363	Acanthus - rear of	300	A. Rogers
{	3364	1833 or 1858?	300	W.M. Lathrop
	3366	Fountain	400	Merriam
	3394	Spruce	400	Blaisdell
2 front posts	3411	Sumac	300	Clark
	3413	Fountain	400	Hovey
	3417	Garden	300	Dickinson
	3453	Fountain	400	Rymes
	3476	Sycamore	300	Whitman
	3493	Rosebay	480	B.C. Clark
{	3496	Oxalis	200	Baldwin
{	3497	"	200	Phinney
	3511	Anemone	370	Sturgis
{	3514	Arethusa	300	Elliott
{	3515	"	300	Ames
	3520	Trefoil	300	Wilder
	3523	Mound	300	Chase
	3524	"	213	Hobbs
	3528	Acanthus	300	Abbott
	3530	Mound	400	Chapman
	3534	"	300	Clark
{	3536	Camellia	225	Hale
{	3537	"	225	Boynton
	3543	Saffron	300	Chase

Thirty two in number -- and less than I had supposed on so long a list.

Will you also, in compliance with the request of the Com^ee on Lots furnish me before next Monday, a list of all lots of which the bounds have been neg-- lected. The above will aid you somewhat, but I am not sure that it embraces all since 3000.

Yours truly

A.J. Coolidge

212

Jany. 31. 5 [1865]

Philander Ames Esq^r Stoneham Mass.

Dear Sir,

Yourself and Mr Chas. D. Elliott of Cambridge purchased two lots in September on Trefoil Path, and we are ignorant of your intentions as to how to divide the lots between you. I looked in a Cambridge Directory for Mr Elliott and did not find his name. I live there myself, but do not know him. As there are four post offices in Cambridge, I prefer to address you my inquiry.

The sketch of the lots, as nearly as I can give it from the dimensions sent me is represented by the following figure: --

[diagram: measurements & orientation]

It is fairly to be presumed that your division line will not run east and west, as that gives you two long and narrow lots. If it runs north and south, of course one takes the front and one the rear.

Will you please ^^state if you divide by lines running north and south, which of you takes the east and which the west part: or how you divide in any case. --

Your speedy reply will oblige.

Yours Resp.y

A.J. Coolidge Secretary.

Jany 2. [186]6

Capt D.L. Winsor

Dear Sir,

I wrote you that Mr Livermore is very anxious to settle his bill with the Treas^r for lots 3509 & 3510; and can do so the moment you write the Treas^r that $65 is to be credited for 52 feet land, as that is the amount which appears by the plan to be overpaid for, @ 1.25 per foot.

I also wrote to Mr Reed, that you should report to him your opinion on the steps to Anemone Path.

We have an adjourned meeting of the Trustees next Monday, no business having been done yesterday. The Trustees can then decide on it.

Please have Mr Safford ascertain & report to me what is the correct position of the members of lot 3514 & 3515 if he can do so on the ground.

[diagram: lot diagram of lot 3515 and lot 3514 with dimensions] Trefoil Arethusa

The above is the way I understand their relative position. Chas. D. Elliott is prop^r of 3514 & Philander Ames of 3515 -- Mr Elliott told me his was the narrow end. But Shedd's survey has reversed this, making 3515 at the narrow end. This I suppose the surveyor got from the stakes. If Mr Elliott was right, the stakes and plan are wrong. If there are interments, they will show. --

There are two lots on Lantana Path -- 2532 & 2841, each of which you reported as 15/20 lots = 300 feet -- By the surveyor's plan, (although the contents are probably the same -- 300 ft) each lot is [diagram: lot diagram with deminsions] so far from a rectangular lot

307