Mount Auburn Cemetery

98

#794-S

Nov. 13, 1888

Simeon E. Baldwin, Esq. New Haven, Conn.

Dear Sir:-

Your note is received, enclosing $2.00 and requesting a report and opinion on the inscription just cut on the Marett monument. A receipt for the amount is herewith enclosed. The inscription is as given below, except that the name Martha B. Marett is cut in a semi-circle to conform to the moulding of the die and to the other inscription.

The workmanship is fair.

Respectfully yours,

Supt

MARTHA B. MARETT

DAUGHTER OF

JOSIAH KNAPP,

WIDOW OF

PHILIP MARETT

DIED SEPT. 2, 1878

AGED 82 YEARS

March 18, [186]5

Philip Marett Esq New Haven, Conn.

Dear Sir,

Yours of 16^th relating to your lot no. 794, addressed to our Treas^r Geo. W^m Bond has been handed to me.

I have taken steps to obtain for you the requisite information, and will report to you in a few days.

Respectfully yours

A.J. Coolidge Sec.y

226

May 12, [186]5

Philip Marett Esq New Haven, Conn.

Dear Sir,

Yours of 8^th last is at hand. I had not completed the requisite preliminaries at the date of its reception.

I am now directed by the Com^ee on Lots, who have considered your application, to inform you that the Corporation will assume the perpetual care and preservation of lot 794 alone for $350. but as this lot is enclosed with lot 462, so that both can be better managed together, they will assume the care of both for $600. --

This estimate will not, of course, form any basis for future negotiations, or bind the Corporation, if the am^t named is left by all, as a Board of Trustees chosen annually cannot bind their successors. It is only a present estimate. --

Very Resp.y yours,

A.J. Coolidge, Sec.y

May 19, 1865

Miss Eliza S. Quincy

Dear Madam

Our surveyors Messrs Shedd & Edson have sent me a sketch of your family lot from which the following is copied:

[diagram: measurements]

This would make a very beautiful lot, if the heirs would incline to remove the iron fence & enclose the whole with a granite border. Iron fences must in the nature of things be temporary. An iron fence will look stiff and angular here, while a graceful could

255

be given to granite curb-stones.

I am at your service to direct what further shall be done.

Very Respectfully yours

A.J. Coolidge Sec.y

May 24 [186]5

A.C. Baldwin Esq 16 Essex St

Dear Sir,

Mr Philip Marett is anxious to have the "lot" in Mt Auburn belonging to him taken charge of by the Corporation for perpetual repair. The Committee on Lots have replied that the Corporation will assume the guaranty for $350 for his lot alone, or if taken with yours, they will take them for $300 each. -- Where two lots are in one enclosure, as in this case, the Trustees prefer not to take one alone. --

If you will entertain the idea of giving this amount for your lot now, please inform me. It certainly will remove all uncertainty about it but if the matter is left to be provided for in one's will, it is quite generally overlooked & forgotten, and few persons find sufficient motion for doing what the prop^r neglected. -- Your early reply will oblige.

Yours Resp.y

A.J. Coolidge

256

Aug 23 [186]5

P.H. Marett Esq New Haven, Ct.

My dear Sir,

I am sorry that I seem to have neglected you. I have been trying for three or four days past to find time to write you: before that, I was not prepared to do so.

The delay has been through my endeavor to learn from Mr Baldwin whether he would join you in the arrangement for keeping both lots in order. I wrote him at once, upon your request to know if the Com. would not accept $300: and I wrote by advice of the Com^ee. I waited long, but, Mr Baldwin did not reply. At last I thought he might be absent, & went to his house to inquire. Finding that he was not away from home (although out of the house, & I did not see him) I wrote another note reminding him of my former. He replied by mail that he did not care to enter into an arrangement at present for perpetual care. I then waited to see the Chairman of the Com^ee. This is the month when people are easy at business, and I did not see him until three or four days ago. I asked him if the Com^ee could approve of $300 independently of the arrangement for both lots, and rec^d a negative reply: that $350 is not too much in your case. In times when a paper dollar was worth a dollar in gold, no less than $300 would have been asked of you. I regret you have had to wait so long, but you perceive it has not been my neglect. -- I return you one of our forms of contract, in case you wish to carry through the arrangement at once, it will save you the trouble of visiting again before reading the contract. Sign it -- Enclose a draft payable to my order (the Treas^r is absent just now) & will acknowledge the rec^t of it, & get contract completed as soon as possible.

Very Resp.y yours

A.J. Coolidge Sec.y

273