Posted on 05/05/2008 5:43:46 AM PDT by Clear Rivers
Visitors stand in the Aldrich Cemetery in Hartland, Vt., Monday, April 21, 2008. A land buyer's proposal to move three graves from the old family cemetery has caused outcry from historians, veterans and neighbors. (AP Photo/Toby Talbot)
HARTLAND, Vt. - The 130-acre property was exactly what Michel Guite and his family wanted: an old Vermont farm with mountain views, rolling hills and meadows.
There was, however, one wrinkle: The property included a small family cemetery — with the grave of a War of 1812 veteran — surrounded by a fence on a scenic knoll.
His proposal to move the graveyard so he can build a house and barn has set off protests. The town has passed a resolution aimed at blocking the move, a descendant of one occupant of the graveyard is trying to fight him in probate court and opponents including military veterans have asked the town to take over the cemetery and keep it where it is.
"We're looking for some precedence setting, because we've never heard of such a heinous thing," said Tom Giffin, president of the Vermont Old Cemetery Association.
Cemeteries have been dug up for public good before, to make way for roads and buildings, but "there's never been the case in the state of Vermont for somebody to move a cemetery to put a house up," Giffin said.
Opponents say it's about honoring the dead, and respecting the graveyard as a historical site.
For Guite, it's about property rights.
"I've got nothing against any of those people," he said. "I'm only going to buy this if a judge says `This is now your land, it's your private property, you're allowed to do whatever you want with it. We hope you look after it well, God bless you for it, and nobody has any right to go on your property than they have to go on every other Vermont farm's property.'"
Guite, 62, of Greenwich, Conn., signed an option to buy the land in December — contingent on being able to move the graves.
Among other things, he doesn't want the graves around his three young children. "I feel that it's improper to have a reminder of the sadness of life so near where children are playing," he said in February.
Guite wants to move three graves that he said are registered with the town, those of War of 1812 veteran Noah Aldrich II, who died Jan. 15, 1848 at age 61; and Aldrich's two grandchildren, who died within a day of each other in 1850 during a flu epidemic.
He proposed moving their graves and headstones to another spot — perhaps on his land, perhaps in the town cemetery.
But historians say there are more than three graves, including that of Aldrich's wife, Lydia. And a previous owner of the land, Jerome King of Hanover, N.H., buried his parents' cremated remains there before selling the farm in the 1980s, and he has said he also opposes moving the graveyard. Descendants of the Kings visit several times a year.
"I'm against it on principal," said Jim Bulmer, a member of the Bridgewater American Legion who attended a Probate Court hearing on the issue with about 10 other veterans. "You've got a veteran in there from the war of 1812, who has come to his final resting place and let the poor guy rest in peace. He served his country. Why do we need to move cemeteries to accommodate an individual who has a particular agenda?"
Moving bodies is not unusual, as in cases of moving family members closer to each other, said Jimmy Johnston, a lobbyist for the Vermont Funeral Directors' Association, and owner of the Barber and Lanier Funeral home in Montpelier.
However, Johnston said, "Moving graves of someone who is not a family member, unless it's eminent domain, I've never heard of one being moved to build a house."
Guite said he followed the law, advertising the move in the newspaper with no objection from immediate relatives.
But in a recent probate court hearing, a judge reached across several generations and designated Marcia Neal of Grand Junction, Colo. — the great, great, great granddaughter of Noah and Lydia Aldrich — as representative for the family.
"I've begun to feel a real personal connection to these people," Neal said.
Although her first inclination would be not to move the graves, she wants to find a solution.
"It has become so involved and sort of complicated. I'd hate to stand in the way of anybody's right to buy and sell property. I would really like to be able to help reach a solution to the problem. I'm not sure what they would be."
Would make a neat plot for a movie.......
“I would really like to be able to help reach a solution to the problem. I’m not sure what they would be.”
Im sure there is a number out there that will help make up her mind.
Wow, what a jerk. The thing is, you really can’t move a grave from that long ago...there’s usually not much of anything left at that point!
I don’t understand. I’d be honored to have a cemetary containing the remains of an American soldier on my property.
Heck, I’d probably maintain the cemetary for free and insure the family and historians had easy access.
I sympathize with the potential owner’s desire to do what he wants with his property, but it isn’t like they’re forcing him to put a cemetary on property he already owns - he’s buying it as is. I guess I would look at it as owning the whole parcel with the exception of that small section containing the cemetary. Deal with it, or go find another piece of land.
wow, i think it would be really awesome to have that old of a gravesite on my property. besides, its 130 acres, and they can’t find anywhere else to put up the house?
I think moving those bodies is a terrible thing to do and hope he doesn’t do it.
I’m a genealogist and have known the name of the place my great great grandfather (a Civil War vet) was buried for some time but didn’t know where it was located. It was small and i’d heard it was overgrown with myrtle and such. I went to the Butler Co Genealogy Society and asked about it and as it turned out the secretary there knew exactly where the graveyard was because it was right across the street from her one room schoolhouse when she was a kid. She drove me over there and it was very overgrown and only 4 headstones still stood and were only legible with a paper and pencil scratching. My ancestors wasnt’ there. But we kept looking and soon a pickup truck comes down the grass at us. As he approached it was clear there was a rifle in the truck. The lady i was with recognized the man in the truck. “Aren’t you Margarets’ husband? The woman who does the Halloween parties?”. Yes, he says. Whew, dodged that bullet. He asked us what we were looking for and we told him and he said that that graveyard was adjacent to his property since he bought it in 1960. He said he can’t clean it up because it is now owned by a Methodist congregation in Maryland and they won’t allow it to be cleaned up. He also said that in the 60’s when kids were on drugs they used to take the headstones and throw them down the hill into the street breaking them or sometimes they’d just steal them. Just a true story.
Sounds like a good plot setup for a ‘50’s horror comic.
Exactly right. On all points.
It is obvious the buyer knew about the cemetery before he bought the land, so why didn’t he do his checking about moving the graves before the purchase? This is not like finding an unmarked cemetery when you are digging a foundation.
That was my reaction as well.
It’s a tough call, we looked at land with a family cemetery on on it. Actually, I remember being told that there was land available with a family cemetery on it.
I think you cut to the core of the matter. Busybodies trying to force someone else who paid the money to do what they, who didn't pay any money, want to do.
“Among other things, he doesn’t want the graves around his three young children. “I feel that it’s improper to have a reminder of the sadness of life so near where children are playing,” he said in February. “
I loved exploring old cemetaries as a kid. Still like it now. They are interesting places. Look at it as an opportunity to experience history first hand.
"I'm only going to buy this if a judge says `This is now your land, it's your private property, you're allowed to do whatever you want with it. We hope you look after it well, God bless you for it, and nobody has any right to go on your property than they have to go on every other Vermont farm's property.'" Guite, 62, of Greenwich, Conn., signed an option to buy the land in December — contingent on being able to move the graves.
This deal is contingent on being able to move the cemetary.
There is probably a lot of money at stake here. Hartland is located near Woodstock and the land around there is very expensive. One of the Rockefellars had a big estate there and others too.
In Virginia family cemeteries are common. I think there is a state law that requires the land owner to give access to those cemeteries. Anyone know more about that?
This is why I want to be cremated. Sooner or later the Earth has to belong to the living.
I was with him until I read this piece of nancitude.
I'd support him more if he wouldn't say such stupid things...
With 130 acres, you would think they’d be able to find another spot for the house.
“They’re he-re!
Make sure that you leave a small carbon footprint and don't eat meat either.
Part of something belonging to the living is a sense of tangible cultural and familial identity.
Without that you may as well be a dog.
This is ridiculous. I grew up near a cemetery and it didn't leave me twisted or socially inept.
(checks ammo supply, pops in "Addams Family" DVD, and dreams of Billary fading away into obscurity...)
I agree. So what if they move them a short distance ? As long as they are identifiable in the new location, they can be moved.
With 130 acres, the only place he can find to build his house is right on the graveyard. There’s no other place, in all 130 acres, that would do?
This notion of shielding children from the fact of death is a recent innovation.
He’s lucky his kids were born today. 150 years ago, it would have been likely that one of his children would end up buried in the grave yard. Things were tough for pregnant women & young children before modern medicine!
It seems to me that with that many acres there would be someplace else to build a house.
Not sure I’d want to dig up a graveyard & build my house on it. Sounds like the plot from Poltergeist.
It seems to me that someone long ago paid something or the graves would not be there. This could open up a can of worms, if lawyers were involved.
The article suggests that the graveyard is located on the most elevated and scenic part of the property.
I would forgo some of that so as not to bother the old cemetary.
130 acres and that’s the ONLY place this fool can find to build a house and barn? Baloney.
This bird has some ulterior motive - probably wants to cut the property up into tracts and sell it off.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that (I’ve done it twice myself) but for goodness sake, design around the fenced area. Show some respect.
This is a common situation in VT. Family cemeteries are all over the place. The Vermonters I know would gladly reach accomodation in a case like this if the buyer behaved in a more reasonable manner. This sort of thing gives “flatlanders” a bad name, and native Vermonters resent such behavior...often with good reason. I cannot understand why, on a 130 acre parcel, a house cannot be sited elsewhere. I would be honored to have the final resting place of an 1812 veteran on my land, and would make certain that descendants, historians, and anyone who would treat it with respect had access to the cemetery. I see a “me-first” attitude here, cloaked in the BS of not wanting his children to view a cemetery. What rubbish.
He hasn’t bought the land yet, and he is now doing his checking about moving the graves.
“It seems to me that someone long ago paid something . . . “
Not necessarily. This is a family cemetery on what used to be family land. But had the family so valued the cemetery, it should have kept it out of the proposed sale as an easement or such. It didn’t so it doesn’t have the right to control what happens to the remains.
I love family cemeteries. I also am a genealogist but if a family is unwilling to preserve the cemetery itself by keeping title to that portion of the entire farm, then I don’t see that the family should have the right to object to the proposed move. That doesn’t mean I favor the move, I just don’t feel that it was proper to appoint some distant, far-off representative for the family in this matter. It ought to be governed by the usual law regarding moving cemetery remains.
Yes the owners long ago paid for the property and buried people on it. Before the current state of the USA where almost everything that is not mandatory is forbidden, people used to bury their dead on their own property. None of which invalidates the point that those who want the cemetary undisturbed could simply buy the property if that were really important, but it isn't. They want someone else to fork out the cash and then tell him what to do with his property without any compensation.
If you would be so honored, why don't you buy it?
It’s his land and he bought it on the conditon that the graves would be moved. Where’s the respect for private property rights?
I call BS on this statement.
I agree. Seems that a thing called "Human Decency" would come into play here. Humankind may be running a little short on that attribute these days.
130 acres and he’s just gotta build the house right there?!
From the article, that seems to be what he is doing.
Guite, 62, of Greenwich, Conn., signed an option to buy the land in December — contingent on being able to move the graves.
Sounds to me like he has not yet bought the property --- he just has first option.
His reason for wanting to move the graves sounds kind of silly to me.
Among other things, he doesn't want the graves around his three young children. "I feel that it's improper to have a reminder of the sadness of life so near where children are playing," he said in February.
What’s ‘nanctitude’?
I feel it is the man’s right to move the graves. After all, it is his private property, he should be able to do with it as he pleases.
The dead will know nothing of the move. They are, after all, dead, and their souls have long since reached their destinations. If the family wanted to keep the graves, it should have bought the graveyard.
Would I keep the graves on my property? Probably. I enjoy history, and would love to have a piece of history on my land. But, I am not him, and have no say over what he does on his land.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.