Hey there, Just been updating myself more on the Crossman issue. Jack/Christine - you said that you've been to see the cemetery, or were going to try and see it? Were the breaks weathered at all, or were the breaks fresh? Just how bad were they? Scrape marks? What kind of time frame would you place on when the breaks occurred? Probably the best person to ask for reference on this would be John in Fayette County... I just got a look at Christine's pictures and now have a slew of questions: Kind of confused of an area that was supposed to be left alone, but markers turned up buried. Was it an ag plowing? How far from the plots were the stones? I don't remember reading anything about the land being farmed in the article, but was called farmland...Were they with any other stones (ie other river rock and field stones that a farmer would remove for plowing) or were they alone (which would lean towards creating intent)? How deep were the markers buried? Were the soils mottled, disturbed around the stones and how 'fresh' was the mottling? Did the soil get a chance to start forming again before the commencement of construction? Some soil establishment, even within an inch would indicate the stones were down for awhile, while mottling all the way to the surface would indicate much more recent removal or disturbance. HOw much was stripped off by machinery? >From the pictures, I did not see ANY other rock in the nearby vacinity of the stone markers, which to me means that accidental plowing by ag farmers would not be supported, unless Columbus, IN is devoid of stones somehow. If it were done by farming, the stones would be in a pile, not spread out and buried, 'cause as we all would know, no farmer in his right mind wants to tear up their equipment. The other odd thing is their arrangement... although I cannot be for certain, but from the pictures, the stones (especially stone number three) appear to have cracked radially, as if by pressure. John Walters, that would be another question for you, since you have probably seen the most types of breaks in stones. Questions for all - IN the 'vague description' of the cemeteries location, there is a discrepancy of location in the plots, whether they were near the edge or center of the property. Did the amount of land increase in the family after the initial interment? Did Mr. Williams own adjacent land, and is that being confused into the original description? What was the original 'benchmark' used to locate the cemetery? How do those descriptions relate to that document? In the argument over land taxes...well, even in the short time that the list has been up, this has been an issue. SOme folks might not have known about the laws concerning taxes and cemeteries or just went along with the program thinking there were no breaks or assistance in that plot of land. I would think that more recent situations concerning tax issues and cemeteries would be able to disrupt that argument. Guess I am looking for the original basic facts here. Sounds like Williams might have had adjacent lands to the original Llewellyn plot and it has become intertwined with the current family land/plot layout. I can't believe that someone would not know the end of their property from the middle of their property...come on! Land boundaries changed somewhere along the line it seems, and that little tidbit is missing something and might be being overlooked somehow. Don't know if these question have been asked or not, most likely, just wanting to make sure. Personally, I would agree with Christine, it would be great if my grand-kids could come visit me and enjoy their surroundings. I would like to see them (Crossman) to encompass the adjacent plot of land meant for a house and use it for a small park, with the cemetery on the side. Parks help generate revenue for communities, and revenue helps keep up cemeteries, and respect keeps 'em all goin'. Russ Hapke LP County