Site 10 - Negro WPA Cemetery
Lewis Towns	Age 25, Died March 13th, 1935 in Fort Eustis Hospital.  Burial March 17th, 1935 At Fort Eustis, VA
James Stokes	Age 54, Died June 15th, 1935 in Fort Eustis Hospital. Burial June 19th, 1935 at Fort Eustis, VA
Frank Duly	Age 43, Died July 12th, 1935 in Fort Eustis Hospital. Burial July 19th, 1935 at Fort Eustis, VA
George J. Findley	Age 27, Died January 8th, 1936 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial January 14th, 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
William Gaskin	Age 35, Died February 10th, 1936 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial February 26, 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
Lee McCann	Age 28, Died May 6th 1936 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial May 13th, 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
John Benjamin	Age 25, Died July 25th 1936. Drowned at Mantee, NC Burial August 12th, 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
John Lambright	Age 31, Died September 18th, 1936. Drowned at Mantee, NC. Burial October 7th, 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
Joe Lea	Age 22, Died September 18th, 1936. Drowned at Mantee, NC Burial October 7th, 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
Site 11 - White WPA Cemetery
Thomas Moore	Age 56, Died December 25th, 1934 in Warwick County Jail Burial December 30th, 1934 at Fort Eustis, VA
William B. Harding	Age 59, Died January 29th 1935 in Riverside Hospital NN VA Burial March 10th, 1935 at Fort Eustis, VA
Edward Anderson	Age 20, Died January 30th, 1935 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial March 10th, 1935 at Fort Eustis, VA
Edward O. Neil	Age 49, Died March 3, 1935 Killed on highway 60 Warwick Co. Burial March 10th, 1935 at Fort Eustis, VA
Phillip Killen	Age 60, Died March 17th 1935 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial March 22nd, 1935 at Fort Eustis, VA
Lee James	Age 25, Died September 23, 1935. Killed by C&O train near Lee Hall, VA. Burial September 29th 1935 at Fort Eustis, VA
Joseph Norman	Age 59, Died December 31st 1935 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial January 12th 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
William E. Simmons	Age 68, Died January 3rd 1936 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial January 12th 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
Robert Ladon	Age 42, Died January 23rd 1936 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial February 21st 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
James W. Rose	Age 29, Died April 4th 1936 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial April 18th 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
Oakey R. Reynolds	Age 57, Died April 21st 1936 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial April 26th 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
Frank J. Toley	Age 54, Died June 17th 1936. Dropped dead in Fort Eustis, VA Burial June 23rd 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA
Clyde Trissue	Age 36, Died June 27th 1936 in Fort Eustis Hospital Burial July 2nd 1936 at Fort Eustis, VA

1660 CHURCH SITE

In addition to those cemeteries discussed above, there is another cemetery which merits mention.  It is located at a former church site, just off Fort Eustis on the old Warwick County Road, which for many years was a Church of England or Episcopal Church (Site 12).  The last known white burial in this cemetery was that of a member of the Southall family in 1820.  Later, the church was turned over to the Negro inhabitants who used it for worship until about 1920.  The earliest tombstones indicate burials in the 1870's.  This cemetery was part of the Mulberry Island community prior to Army acquisition of what is now Fort Eustis and research into the history and ownership of this old cemetery and church site which dates back to 1660, has been a continuing project for interested historians.

Disposition Form: Reference AHBE-IO
TO: USA Trans Museum
ATTN:   Mrs. Davis
FROM:  Information O
Date:      14 March 72

1.  The Information Officer has no objection to the release of a study by retired Army Col. Jean M. Gray on Mulberry Island Cemeteries.

2.  The only possible negative public relations impact from this concerns certain of the grave sites which were destroyed during various construction operation many years ago.  Since this happened so very long ago and the Army is now maintaining the remaining marked sites, it is believed that the danger of a negative public reaction is minimal.

3.  It is understood that the paper will be circulated to area libraries, association members and others interested in area history.  If further use of the Information is made (such as publication in a magazine or newspaper), it will be necessary to consult again with the Information Officer.

JOHN H. EVANS
Major, TC
Information Officer

The Army & Damage Control About the Cemeteries

The problems seem to begin with a letter written in 1932 requesting information about the cemeteries.  I am presenting the letters, including the military correspondence, in chronological order.  It is an interesting story that unfolds.  At the end of this section you will find a letter that states that the issue of the Jones House Cemetery made it to the US Congress and resulted in the Commanding General then promised the Congress that no other grave would be disturbed on Fort Eustis.  Miss Shaw opened a hornets nest.  She only wrote two very short letters, but with her word choice she seemed to get the whole Army jumping.  I have not yet identified who she was and how she related to the Jones family.

There was apparently a first letter from Miss Shaw to the Federal Correctional Camp at Ft. Eustis.  I do not have this letter but do have the reply from Joseph W. Sanford, Superintendent.

Miss A. E. Shaw
Hotel Lamm
715 West 6th Street
Lost Angeles, Calif.

Dear Madam:

I have your letter of October 9, 1932 making inquiry as to the disposition of tombstones removed from the Mathew Jones cemetery.

You are advised that this reservation was occupied by the US Bureau of Prisons as a Federal Prison on October 20, 1931 and the Bureau of Prisons had no connection heretofore with this reservation or with the construction of any roads or other building on the reservation.  Prior to October 1931 the reservation was solely under the jurisdiction of the War Department.  For information as to the disposition of tombstones in the cemetery you are respectfully referred to the War Department.

Joseph W. Sanford, Superintendent

Letter from Miss A.E. Shaw, 715 W. 6 St., Los Angeles, CA, 29 October 1932

War Dept.
By reading letter on reverse side (I do not have this letter) you will see that I am seeking information about the present location of the tombstones removed from the Matthew Jones Cemetery, Mulberry Island, now a part of Ft. Eustis.  This was done, without the knowledge or consent of any one of the Jones descendants - and seems to ____? & unnecessary desecration since a road could have as well been constructed other than thro a private burial ground.  Those tombstones contained dates of  much value to the compilers of a Matthew Jones family history now being written for publication.  This was a family of much distinction in Colonial affairs.  I am a direct descendant & as such am requesting prompt information.
Miss A. E. Shaw

Reply from War Department, Office of Quartermaster General, Washington, 10 Nov 1932

Subject:  Removal of Tombstones - Fort Eustis, Virginia

To:          Quartermaster, Third Corps Area, Baltimore, MD
                THROUGH Commanding General, Third Corps Area

1.  Inclosed is a copy of letter dated October 29, 1932, from Miss A.E. Shaw of Los Angeles, California, requesting information as to the disposition made of tombstones removed from the Matthew Jones Cemetery on Mulberry Island, now a part of Fort Eustis, Virginia.

2.  Maps on file in this office do not show the location of the Matthew Jones Cemetery at Fort Eustis, nor do the records contain any information concerning the disposition of the tombstones alleged to have been removed.

3.  It is desired that the records of the Third Corps Area, pertaining to Fort Eustis be searched and report rendered in regard to the above matter.

For The Quartermaster General
M. D. Wheeler
Major, Q.M.C.
Assistant

Letter from HQ Third Corps Area Baltimore to Quartermaster General Washington
10 Dec 1932

The only information in this matter that could be discovered is contained in the following quotation from a letter received from Mr. Joseph W. Sanford, Superintendent of the Federal Correctional Camp, now located at Fort Eustis, Virginia, in answer to a letter of inquiry from this office:

"This cemetery, it is said, was located immediately in the
real of the Matthew Jones house.  This is the old brick house
near the sewage plant on the James River.  One of the men who
worked here during the War has told me that the cemetery was
located immediately in the rear of the house and that grading,
incident tot he installation of the railroad curve which passes in
the rear of the house, necessitated the removal of the cemetery
and none of the tombstones were preserved."

A.K. Baskette
Colonel, Q.M.C.,
Quartermaster

Reply to Miss Shaw from Asst. Secretary of War, 27 Dec 1932

Dear Madam:

Further reference is made to your letter dated October 29, 1932, requesting information concerning the disposition of tombstones alleged to have been removed from a cemetery on the Fort Eustis Military Reservation, Virginia.

You are informed that the records do now indicate that any cemeteries were located or the tracts of land acquired by the Government for the establishment of Fort Eustis.  If the cemetery referred to in your letter existed at the time the Government acquired the reservation it is possible that the tombstones were removed during the construction period.  If so, the disposition made of same is unknown.

You are further informed that the deeds conveying the various tracts of land to the Government which comprise Fort Eustis do not contain any restrictions or provisions which would preclude the use or disposal of the property by the Government.

F.M. Payne
The Assistant Secretary of War

Letter from Miss Shaw to Assistant Secretary of War, 19 December 1932

Assistant Secretary of War.

Referring to previous letters about the removal of tombstones by the War Dept. from the Matthew Jones private cemetery - Mulberry Island, Ft. Eustis, without the consent of descendents of the M. Jones family, request you look over files & at once investigate the matter & notify me where these may be located, or if destroyed then we can take definite action in the matter.  No branch of the Gov't is immune from liability for such wanton & unnecessary desecration any more than a individual or corporation.  I shall expect a prompt & thorough investigation & reply before we go further with the matter.

Miss A.E. Shaw
514 Figueroa Street
Los Angeles, Calif.

Letter Quartermaster General to Asst. Sec. of War, Judge Advocate General,
 10 January 1933

Subject: Removal of tombstones - Fort Eustis, Virginia

To:         The Assistant Secretary of War - THROUGH The Judge Advocate General

1.  Attention is invited to inclosed letter dated December 10, 1932 from Miss A.E. Shaw of Los Angeles, California, relative to the disposition of tombstones alleged to have been removed from a cemetery on the Fort Eustis Military Reservation, Virginia, which letter was transmitted to this office for necessary action by your route slip dated December 28, 1932.

2.  In view of the possibility of a claim being filed against the Government, it is recommended that reply to the letter dated December 19, 1932, be prepared by the Judge Advocate General.

3.  In connection with the above matter there is also inclosed a file containing photostats of previous correspondence relating the matter.  It will be noted that upon receipt of Miss Chaw's letter dated October 29, 1932, an inspection was made of the records of this office and the Third Corps Area for information regarding (?) to the alleged removal of the tombstones in question and _______? of the statement of the employee at Fort Eustis quoted in the ___________(?) December 10, 1932, an attached file,  the files discussed no information pertaining to the matter.

4.  Assuming that the statement quoted in the 1st indorsement dated December 10, 1932, above mentioned, as true, the cemetery in question if existing at the time the Government assumed possession of the land, would be located within the boundaries of the tract of land acquired from Emmett W. Milstead and Henry J. Milstead, his wife, by deed dated July 23, 1918, or the tract acquired from ______ _______ Bulley, by deed dated May 27, 1918.

For the Quartermaster General:
B. H. ___(?)
Brigadier General, Q.M.C.
Assistant

Letter from War Department, J.A.G. to Asst. Secretary of War, 4 Feb 1933

Contracts & Reservations
JAG-293.6
War Department, J.A.G.

To The Assistant Secretary of War.

1.  By memorandum dated January 10, 1933, The quartermaster General forwards to you through this office with the recommendation that a reply thereto be prepared by this office, a letter address to the War Department from Miss A.E. Shaw, 514 South Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, California, inquiring as to the disposition made of certain tombstones removed from the Matthew Jones private cemetery, Mulberry Island, now a part of Fort Eustis Reservation, Virginia.

2.  Under date of October 29, 1932, Miss Shaw addressed a communication tot he War Department to the same effect, the receipt of which was acknowledged by The Assistant Secretary of War by letter dated November 12, 1932.

3.  The records of the War Department make no reference to the cemetery mentioned and the only information concerning the same is contained in 1st indorsement dated December 10, 1932, from the Quartermaster, Third Corps Area, to The Quartermaster General in which it is said:

"This cemetery, it is said, was located
immediately in the rear of the Matthew Jones
house.  This is the old brick house near the
sewage plant on the James River.  One of the men
who worked here during the War has told me that
the cemetery was located immediately in the rear
of the house and that grading, incident to the
installation of the railroad curve which passes
in the rear of the house, necessitated the
removal of the cemetery and none of the tombstone
were preserved."

4.  By letter dated December 27, 1932, from The Assistant Secretary of War to Miss Shaw, she was advised:

"***that the records do not indicate that
any cemeteries were located on the tracts of
land acquired by the Government for the
establishment of Fort Eustis.  If the cemetery
referred to in your letter existed at the time
the Government acquired the reservation it is
possible that the tombstones were removed
during the construction period.  If so, the
disposition made of same is unknown.
You are further informed that the deeds
conveying the various tracts of land to the
Government which comprise Fort Eustis do not
contain any restrictions or reservations which
would preclude the use or disposal of the
property by the Government."

This letter had not been received by Miss Shaw at the time the letter from her of December 10, 1932, which is now under consideration, was written.

5.  A letter prepared for the signature of The Assistant Secretary of War has been drafted in this office advising Miss Shaw that the War Department is unable to furnish any further information than was contained in the letter of December 27, 1932, above referred to.

For The Judge Advocate General:
Myron C. Cramer
Major, J.A.C.D.
Chief of Section.

Letter from Asst. Secretary of War to Miss Shaw, 3 February 1933

Miss A.E. Shaw
514 South Figueroa Street
Lost Angeles, California
Dear Miss Shaw:

Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of December 19, 1932, requesting information concerning the disposition of tombstones alleged to have been removed from the Matthew Jones private cemetery on the Fort Eustis Reservation, Virginia.

The War Department wrote you with regard to this matter on December 27, 1932, in reply to an earlier letter from you.  The War Department regrets that it is unable to furnish any further information than was contained in the letter sent you on December 27, 1932.

F.H. Payne
The Assistant Secretary of War

No further correspondence is known to me until 1952.  These 4 letter are about the 2 cemeteries that hold the remains of the WPA workers and who should maintain the plots.  They follow.

Letter, Headquarters Ft. Eustis to Commanding General, Ft. Meade, 21 Oct 1952

Headquarters
The Transportation Center
Fort Eustis, Virginia

To:  Commanding General
       Second Army
       Fort George. G. Meade, MD

Subject:  Burial Plots

1.  There are located at this station two (2) burial plots, one consisting of nine (9) graves, the other thirteen (13) graves.  The records of this station indicate that the remains are those of indigent personnel who were buried in these plots during 1934 to 1936, during which period of time this reservation was under the control of the Emergency Relief Administration of the State of Virginia.  These burial plots are now fenced and are being maintained by the Post Engineer in conjunction with the maintenance of grounds and the post beautification program.

2.  This station has had previous correspondence with your headquarters and the Office of Quartermaster General regarding these burial plots, but no decision was ever reached as to their status. Since these graves do not contain military personnel, it is the opinion of this headquarters that they should not be considered a post cemetery as defined in par. 2, AR 210-190, dated 26 September 1952.

3.  In order that this station may be apprised as to the category of these burial plots and the further responsibility in connection with their care and maintenance, it is requested that a clarification of their status be me.

For The Commanding General:
Floyd W. Crouch, Jr.
Captain, IC
Act Asst Adj Gen

Letter of Response

AIAWN-R 601 (Eustis, Va)
Headquarters Second Army, Fort George G. Meade, Maryland

To:  Commanding General, Fort Eustis, Virginia

Real Estate records of the Office of the District Engineer, Washington District, and of this headquarters do not indicate that the Department of the Army has any responsibility for maintenance and care of the two (2) burial plots referred to in basic letter.  They are not considered as post cemeteries as defined by paragraph 2, AR 210-190, dated 26 September 1952.  The maintenance of private abandoned cemeteries on Army installations is a repairs and utilities responsibility only to the extent prescribed in TM 5-630.  They should not be allowed to become a hazard, unsightly or a source of contamination.

(Signature unreadable)

In the summer of 1954 the Army stumbled upon an overgrown abandoned cemetery while building the golf course now known as Cemetery Site #2, Curtis Family Cemetery.  Below is the report of the condition when found  and a letter from the Post Engineer on what to do about it.

Headquarters
Transportation Training Command
Office of the Staff Judge Advocate
Fort Eustis, Virginia

MEMORANDUM TO: The Chief of Staff                              9 September 1954

Subject:  Disposition of Abandoned Cemetery

1.  As directed by the Cief of Staff, the following opinion discusses the legal aspects and suggested disposition of an abandoned cemetery discovered while preparing for a golf course.

2.  OPINION

The land upon which the abandoned cemetery is located was acquired by the United States by warranty deeds from Cornelia Garrow and James S. Garrow (Deed dated 21 June 1918, recorded 11 November 1918, Deed Book 39, Page 423, Denbigh) and Mary L. Wright (Deed dated 23 July 1918, recorded 22 November 1918, Deed Book 41, page 12, Denbigh).  The United States has apparently been in continuous and undisturbed possession for more than thirty-five years.

At some time prior to World War II the area was cut over, presumably by lumbering contractors under contracts let by the District Engineer's Office in Atlanta, Georgia.  Due to normal retirement of records there are at present no records in the Office of the Post Engineer from which the time and circumstances of that operation can be established.  However, physical evidence remaining at the time of present operations indicates that a sawmill was located within a few yards of the abandoned cemetery, with a sawdust heap immediately adjacent to the graves.  Part of the cemetery area was actually covered over with a substantial layer of earth, which was so grown up in weeds, brush and vines as to indicate that it had been undisturbed since the time of the lumbering operations.  Moreover, Mr. Fyfe (Post Engineer's Office) states that he stumbled onto the remains of this cemetery in 1945 when he was running a survey through the area, and that at that time it was in a completely abandoned condition with no fence or stones standing.  It was so completely grown over that if the survey line had not led him directly to the cemetery area he would not have suspected its existence.

At the time of present clearing operations, the cemetery area was so completely obscured by soil, saplings, and undergrowth that no evidence of its former use was detected until after the bull-dozer operator had cut away the thick vegetation and removed a layer of soil.  At that time broken stones were discovered among the rubble removed, and the outline of one grave was discovered.  At that point a marble tombstone base and brick edging around the grave indicates that the blade of the bull-dozer has cut only to the original ground level, and not lower.

At the present time the location of only one grave can be determined, and the identity of the person interred therein is unknown.  Parts of a broken iron fence and all fragments of tombstones have been collected, but the only decedents' names recognizable are those of "Dr. H.H. Curtis" and Annie Curtis Smith".  As a practical matter, it is not now possible to return this cemetery so long abandoned and neglected, to its original condition.

The law with respect to abandoned cemeteries is not clear, and varies from state to state.  Corpus Juris Secundum summarizes the strict rule and the more liberal rule in successive paragraphs as follows:

"A cemetery does not lose its character as such from
mere disuse or because further interment in it has
ceased or become impossible, and where premises have
been dedicated as a graveyard, they remain subject to
that use so long as bodies remain buried there, and
 until they are removed by public authority, or by
friends or relatives.

As it has been said to have been well stated in Corpus
Juris, so long as a cemetery is kept and preserved as
a resting place for the dead, with anything to indicate
the existence of graves, or so long as it is known or
recognized by the public as a cemetery, it is not
abandoned, but it may be said to be abandoned where all
the bodies have been removed, or the cemetery has been
so long neglected as entirely to lose its identity as
such, and is no longer known, recognized, and respected
by the public as a cemetery.  Abandonment may result
from inconsistent use, as where the public and those
interested in a cemetery have permanently appropriated
it to a use or uses entirely inconsistent with its
purpose as a cemetery, so that it has become impossible
to use it longer for cemetery purposes." (14 C.J.S. 82)

No Virginia case directly in point has been found, but in a case which varies materially on its facts the court said in pertinent part:

"(2) The courts are much divided as to the character
of the estate one may have in a burial lot in a cemetery.
It is certain that it is not a fee.  The weight of authority
is, and we think the better view, that it is a mere privi-
lege or license to make interments in the lot exclusively
of others as long as the burying ground or cemetery
remains as such." (Kincaid's appeal, 66 Pa. 411.5
Am. Rep. 377; Partridge v. First Independent Church
of Baltimore, 39 Md. 631; Bessemer Land Co. v. Jenkins,
111 Ala. 135, 18 South. 565, 56 Am. St. Rep. 26)

In Kincaid's Appeal, supra, the court held that:

"The lot holder purchased a license - nothing more -
irrevocable as long as the place continued a burying
ground, but giving no title to the soil. *** But if
in the course of time it should become necessary to
vacate the ground as a burying ground, all that he
could claim, either in law or equity, would be that
he should have due notice and the opportunity afforded
to him of removing the bodies and monuments to some
other place of his own selection, or that on his failing
to do so such removal should be made by others.  He
accepted the grant or license subject to this necessary
condition." (Grinnan v. Fredericksburg Lodge No. 4,
A.F. & A.M., 88 S.E.79)

The case cited above dealt with a situation where a removal of the bodies was proposed, and the court refused to grant an injunction to prevent such removal.  In the present situation, however, the exact location and identification of graves is not possible, so that removal of the bodies is not reasonably practicable.

Even where the strict rule is followed, it has been held that one may "abandon his right to damages for the negligent or willful  invasion of what should be a hallowed spot" (Frost v. Columbia Clay Co., 124 S.E. 767).  It is the opinion of this office that the facts in the present situation show a complete abandonment by all potential parties in interest, so as t bar any action for damages arising out of any molestation of this burial plot.

It is noted that any claim for damages would have to be brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which bars any claim not initiated within two years of the date upon which the action accrues.

3.  RECOMMENDATIONS:  In view of the facts and law set forth above, it is recommended:

     a.  That the remnants of the iron fence found in the area concerned be disposed of as salvage; stored by Post Engineer.

     b.  That the fragments of tombstones be collected and stored in the custody of the Post Engineer.

     C.  That the boundaries of the abandoned cemetery be determined, as near as possible without such digging as could disturb remains, and be recorded by the Post Engineer.

     D.  That the entire area then be leveled over with soil so as to return it to the unidentifiable, abandoned, and forgotten status in which it rested prior to its recent rediscovery, except that a stone marker level with the ground be placed at the location of the one recognizable but unidentified grave.

     E.  That this opinion along with the record of the location of the abandoned cemetery be placed in a protected file in the office of the Post Engineer who will take the necessary appropriate action in the future to prevent any inadvertent disturbance of remains.

G.E. Crane
Lt Col, JAGC
Staff Judge Advocate

Transportation Training Command
Office of the Commanding General
Fort Eustis, Virginia

Subject:  Disposition of Abandoned Cemetery                        14 September 1954

Thru:       ACOFS, G-4, Fort Eustis, Virginia

1.  It has been reported that in the process of constructing a golf course on this post you have discovered an abandoned cemetery, together with remnants of an iron fence and certain broken tombstones.

2.  The following disposition will be made of said abandoned cemetery and its appurtenances:

     a.  The remnants of iron fence and fragments of tombstones will be collected and stored in your custody;

     b.  The boundaries of the cemetery will be determined as nearly as possible without such digging as could disturb remains, and will be recorded in your office; and

     c.  The entire area will be leveled over with soil and a stone marker level with the ground will be placed at the location of the one recognizable but unidentified grave.

3.  This directive, the attached opinion of the Staff Judge Advocate, and your record of the location of the abandoned cemetery (prepared in compliance with paragraph 2b above) will be placed in a protected file in your office.

4.  You and each successive Post Engineer will take appropriate action to prevent any inadvertent disturbance of remains and to insure that each successive Post Engineer is so advised.

By Command of Major General Besson:
T.B. Tufte
Colonel, GS
Chief of Staff

In 1960 it appears a Capt. Pederson requested by telephone that several reports be submitted to him.  The longest does not appear to be complete.  It talks about Annex "D" and Annex "E" and nothing else.  The Annex "E" report appears to be missing page 2, but I may be mistaken.  Where annexes A, B, and C are is any ones guess.  The Annex reports do not show an author so credit cannot be given.  KLS

ANNEX "D"

Group 1

The various graves, family plots and cemeteries located on Mulberry Island have been variously identified by Mr. W. G. Fyfe, Asst. Post Engineer; SFC Alvin I Krigsvold, Asst. Gold Course Maintenance NCO; Mr. Andrew C. Crafford, former landowner - Mulberry Island and Mr. Norris D. Nettles, DAC and also former inhabitant - Mulberry Island.  Additional Site #2 and Site #4 (See Annex C Group I) are geographically located on existing maps filed in the Office of the Post Engineer.

Reducing the information, obtained from the above mentioned sources, to a short narrative, it was determined that:

The Mulberry Island portion of the Fort Eustis Military Reservation was acquired prior to World War I (1918).  In the period 1919-1920 there were established, in the area of the present Fort Eustis Golf Course, a machine gun range.  During this particular period gravestones and fences were broken and apparently were eventually all knocked down to prevent ricochets on the range.

Mr. Crafford and Mr. Nettles stated verbally that although there were headstones and fences around the plots referred to as Sites #1, #2, and #3, which were later destroyed, that when the acquisition was initiate by the U.S. Government, that former occupants were given opportunity to remove remains of their beloved at government expense to some other site.  There were several removals from the Curtis-Wright-Smith Family Plot (Site #2) and the Crafford-Nettles Family Plot (Site #1) to a place named Lebanon Church (In the Newport News area).  It is not known whether any removals were made from other sites located on Mulberry Island.

Records are not now in existence (if in fact there ever were) that would indicate names, dates, circumstances, etc.  The three (3) small plot sketches, (Sites #1, #2, and #3) which are inclosed in Annex "C", were developed from information obtained from Mr. Crafford and Mr. Nettles and are considered to be reasonably accurate.  Also inclosed in this annex is a listing of the interments in the Crafford-Nettles Family Plot.

3  Incls
   1.  Statement - Mr. Fyfe
   2.  Statement - Sgt. Krigsvold
   3.  List Crafford-Nettles Family Plot

GROUP II

The two (2) cemeteries located on the Main Post Area of the Fort Eustis Military Reservation cannot be determined to be militarily established activities.  There are no records in U.S. Army Transportation Training Command; Office, Chief of Transportation; District Engineer Office, Hqs. Second U.S. Army; Office, Chief of Engineer nor in the Office of the Quartermaster General of these cemeteries.

ANNEX "E"

This annex will be concerned with the specific and minute mechanics of accomplishment of the recommendations set forth in the basic Staff Study.  The below outlined procedures were coordinated with Col. Harry D. Temple, Chief, Memorial Division, Office of the Quartermaster General and Mr. Jesse D. Myers, Acting Chief, Cemetery Branch, Memorial Division, OQMG.

GROUP I

It is recommended that no action now be taken concerning the Mulberry Island Cemetery Club (Site #4), but that it be considered abandoned.  Sites #1, #2, and #3 be marked by the implacement of a terra-cotta pipe, sunk to ground level at the geographical center of each plot, which has a bronze disc at the top with the follow verbage:

Site #1 - Crafford-Nettles Family Plot
Site #2 - Curtis-Wright-Smith Family Plot
Site #3 - Indeterminate Negro Cemetery

For detailing see the figure 43, TM 10-287, extracted as enclosure #1. (do not have)

It is further recommended that the head-stones and other appurtenances now located in the Negro Cemetery - Main Post Area, be buried in the plot known as the Curtis-Wright-Smith Family Plot (Site #2), from whence they came.

When the above has been accomplished, no further maintenance shall be required.

GROUP II

The two (2) cemeteries located on the Main Post Area should be maintained in perpetuity.  This includes police of area, maintenance of existing fence and gates, mowing of grass, etc.

Those gravesite, which are not now marked, should be marked in accordance with the information shown in the inclosure at Annex D fro Group II plots.

Letter to Capt. Warren E. Pedersen from William G. Fyfe, 30 Sep 1960

1.  As requested by Capt. Pedersen in telephone conversation, the following information is furnished relative to the cemetery northeast of Mulberry Island Road Station 115-0.

2.  In 1954 I was informed that there was an abandoned cemetery in the way of clearing and grading operations at the golf course.  Investigation disclosed a few scattered, knocked down headstones in a briar patch.  These markers were scarred, supposedly from bullets fired at the moving target on the Langley Field firing range.  The Judge Advocate Division was contacted for legal advice, and on their recommendations, action as follows was taken:

     A.  Headstones were removed to Post Engineer Storage Yard.
     B.  A marker was placed in the burial plot.
     C.  The marker was located in reference to Mulberry Island Road and Post engineer Drawing C
           2248 made showing the location.
     D.  The area was cleared of briars and policed.

William G. Fyfe, Assistant Post Engineer

CERTIFIED TRUE COPY:
Warren E. Pedersen, Mortuary Officer, Quartermaster.

Report on Graves and Cemeteries, Alvin I. Krigsvold, 30 September 1960

I have been asked to give a report on graves and/or cemeteries found at the present site of the Fort Eustis Golf Course.

There are two known locations.  One is a cemetery consisting of several graves.  It is located between # three and # four fairways.  At the time we came upon it, it was overgrown with briars and scrub timber.  There were several markers.  Some of them were broken and had been hit by assumed rifle bullets.  The markers were picked up and placed in a large crate and sent to Post Engineers by orders of Deputy Chief of Staff and the Project Officer.  A group of trees were left at the site to mark it.  According to Post maps at the time the cemetery was marked abandoned.

The other location is to the east of # two tee.  There were two single graves of the brick surface type vaults.  When we came upon the first one we dozed it out with a bulldozer thinking it was a part of an old foundation.  As soon as we saw that it was a vault we notified the Project Officer who in turn called the Deputy Chief of Staff.  He came out to inspect it and went back to post and checked with the Judge Advocate's Office.  According to what I was told the two graves were unknown and I was told to doze the remains of the vault that was destroyed into # two tee and to build a small mound over the remaining one which I did.

Alvin I. Krigsvold

Memo from Mr. Moenk, Historian, to CS, 2 October 1961

1.  As recommended by the National Archives in Washington I personally visited the Virginia State Library and and Virginia Archives Warehouse on Friday, 29 September.

2.  Neither the State Library nor the Archives Warehouse has any indication of the disposition of the WPA Administrative Records for the period 1935-1939.  In a personal interview with the Chief Archivist for the State of Virginia he indicated that he has no knowledge whatsoever of the existence of such records.  It is believed that these records were most probably destroyed because of lack of storage space during the late 1940's.

3.  Since the Administrative Records do not exist, it is almost impossible to trace the identity of the persons interred in the two cemetery plots to the rear of Building S-920.  The only information available in the Virginia State Library is contained in three issues of the Atlantis Magazine published by the WPA Camp.  This is the only set still in existence and is incomplete.  The newspapers do contain notices of a number of deaths and burials in the Fort Eustis Cemetery; as the two plots were then called.  No further information, however, is given on the people concerned.  Since a number of the bodies interred in two plots are of an age to preclude military service in World War I, their names can be eliminated from any list of possible military veterans.  One possibility still exists; a list of those names of eligible age for World War I duty could be forwarded to TAG in a Command Letter with a request that World War I service records be checked to indicate their veteran status.  Since, however, we have only the name of the person and his age at time of death, this may not prove sufficient information to TAG.

4.  In pursuing research in the WPA Records available at the Virginia State Library, a Historical Project concerning cemeteries in the Warwich County area was uncovered.  Copies of the cemeteries located on Fort Eustis property are attached.  It should be noted that the Curtis Family cemetery which is located in the vicinity of the TRECOM Test Area contains the body of a Confederate Veteran.  This could prove troublesome in the event that the Daughters of the Confederacy or some such Southern Association demand recognition for the grave.  Two cemeteries are also located within Fort Crawford.

5.  It is also noted that the oldest graveyard in the county area was located immediately to the rear of the Jones house (Fitchett Graveyard).  The railroad track and River Road cross directly of the middle of that graveyard.  In addition the Crafford Family graveyard which is located by the Golf Course Maintenance Shop is one of two graveyards in the immediate vicinity.  The Crafford Family Slave graveyard was located near the family cemetery plot.

6.  Information on these cemeteries will be kept in the permanent historical files of the Command in event any question should arise in the future.

Mr. Jean R. Moenk, Historian

Memo from Mrs. Davis, Historian to Post Engineers, 2 December 1964

1.  Research indicated there are approximately 12 private cemeteries located on this installation.

2.  According to AR 420-74, the installation Commander is responsible for "economical maintenance" of the cemeteries.

3.  In order to verify our records and determine what action will be necessary to comply with this requirement, it is requested that the Post Engineers investigate and report on the sites shown on the attached sheet.  (Not included in this file.  I assume it is the same map scanned above.)  Cemeteries 1-6 are shown for information only since five of these have been located and surveyed, while the sixth has been destroyed.  Information needed on the remaining six cemeteries includes their exact location, condition, number of graves, and number of markers, if any.

4.  Assistance will be provided by the Historian as required.

Emma-Jo Davis, Historian

Response, 22 December 1964

To Historian, From Engineer

This office cannot add to the information already contained in inclosure 1.  It is suggested that an enlisted detail be requested to search for these cemeteries or a notice be placed in the Daily bulletin requesting hunters or anyone else having knowledge of the cemeteries on Mulberry Island contact your office.

L. A. Meyer, Lt. Colonel, TC, Engineer

Memo, Mrs. Davis, Historian, to Post Engineers, 30 December 1964

1.  Several times in the past, this installation has been embarrassed by the inadvertent disturbance of private cemeteries located within its jurisdiction.  In fact, the destruction of the Jones House Cemetery was discussed by the United States Congress and resulted in the Commanding General then promising the Congress that no other grave would be disturbed at Fort Eustis.  Later, three cemeteries were discovered during the construction of the Golf Course.  Until some effort is made to locate and mark these sites, a continuing danger exists that they  may, through lack of knowledge, be damaged.  Of particular concern, because of the locations, are cemeteries 10 and 12 on the attached table. (Not attached)

2.  AR 420-74 is explicit on the responsibilities of the Commander concerning these cemeteries.  It is possible that private cemeteries could be included on an IG Inspection, as are the two WPA Cemeteries.

3.  Request that this project be undertaken by Engineers as outlined in comment 1 and as time permits, with priority given to cemeteries 10 and 12.  The approximate location of the 12 cemeteries given in inclosure 1 are shown on the attached map.

Emma-Jo Davis, Historian