MONROVIA UNION CEMETERY, CHARLESTON COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA

CHICORA RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION 339

•

a,'.

.,!.J.di'"

i.J1;':.:ilt; lA 2 $

5... :1:.4.:0 $3.

0 . ;-,Ii

; ; ... ,

MONROVIA UNION CEMETERY, CHARLESTON COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA

Prepared By: Michael Trinkley, Ph.D., RPA

Prepared For: Mr. John R. Greiner

Conoco, Inc. 600 N. Dairy Ashford Houston, TX 77079

and Ms. Christina C. Staib, PE

URS Diamond 140 Cypress Station Dr., Suite 140

Houston, TX 77090 Chicora Research Contribution 339 Chicora Foundation, Inc. P.O. Box 8664 861 Arbutus Drive Columbia, South Carolina 29202-8664 Email: chicora@bellsouth.net

www.chicora.org October 3, 2001

This report is printed on permanent paper ∞.

©2001 by Chicora Foundation, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, or transcribed in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without prior permission of Chicora Foundation, Inc. except for brief quotations used in reviews. Full credit must be given to the authors, publisher, and project sponsor.

i

ABSTRACT

The Monrovia Union Cemetery, often called just Monrovia Cemetery, is an African American cemetery situated west of I-26, off Oceanic Street and just south of Braswell Street in North Charleston. The property to the north will shortly be undergoing remediation for heavy metal contamination — the result of years of industrial activity.

As a result, this brief historical study was conducted to learn more about the formation of the cemetery, its activities on the site, and the land-use history of the property. The goal is to determine the potential for human burials intruding into the adjacent industrial tract and provide guidance should human remains be identified during the remediation work.

The investigations found that the cemetery property was acquired in 1872 by James D. Price, John M. Reed, Charles Bryan, Thomas R. Small, and William Thomas, presumably the first trustees of the Monrovia Union Cemetery Company. Although no papers of incorporation have been found, we assume that the cemetery company was either a for-profit or beneficial company. We have not been able to determine if the company is still in operation, although the grounds are cared for and there are very recent interments in the cemetery.

The property today consists of ca. 3.7 acres of high ground. Burials are clearly marked primarily on the western half. The rolling topography of the eastern section, however, suggests that unmarked burials are present. There is a loop road, with access off Oceanic Street. A container situated at the southern edge of the cemetery contains funeral service materials. A ditch separates the cemetery from industrial property to the north and marsh to the west. A chain link fence surrounds the tract.

The topography is generally level, although there is a sizable mound on the northern edge of the property. This mound is clearly artificial, consisting of alternating lenses of dark

and light soil about 3 to 4 feet in height. The fill is generally clean and appears to have been brought into the site to allow above grade burials.

This investigation failed to identify any conclusive evidence that the area north of the ditch has ever been incorporated into the cemetery or was used as cemetery. The ditch was not originally a boundary line, although it is a historical feature and, in 1872, was used as a boundary line. This ditch may also have originally extended further to the east than at present.

Nevertheless, we recommend caution in any land disturbing activities affecting the ditch (whether cut or fill activities are involved). The discovery of any bones, coffin parts (wood or metal) or coffin hardware (for example, handles), should result in all ground disturbing activities to come to a halt.

Under South Carolina law, the Charleston County Coroner should be immediately notified of the find. Pending their determination that the find is not forensic, the State Archaeologist’s Office (who has jurisdiction over all non-forensic human remains) should then be notified. Chicora Foundation can initially verify finds and coordinate the notification process, if desired.

ii

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures iv Introduction 1 Historic Synthesis 5 Current Condition 13 Recommendations 17

iv

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project vicinity in the Charleston Neck area 2 2. Monrovia Union Cemetery and adjacent industrial tracts 3 3. Plat of the Monrovia Union Cemetery 6 4. Portion of the ca. 1864 Map of the Defences of Charleston showing the vicinity 7 5. Ashepoo Fertilizer Company showing Monrovia Union Cemetery 8 6. Sanborn Fire Insurance Map of 1884 showing the Ashepoo Fertilizer Company 9 7. Portion of the 1919 USGS Charleston topographic map showing the cemetery 10 8. Portion of the 1943 USGS Charleston topographic map showing the cemetery 10 9. 1949 aerial photograph of the cemetery area 11 10. 1967 aerial photograph of the cemetery area 11 11. Sign for Monrovia Cemetery 13 12. View of the cemetery from the entrance looking west 13 13. View of the rise in the northwestern quadrant of the cemetery 14 14. Lensed soil of the rise exposed in a recently opened grave shaft 15

INTRODUCTION

This investigation was conducted by Dr.Michael Trinkley of Chicora Foundation, Inc. forMr. John F. Greiner of Conco and Ms. Christina C.Staib, PE of URS Diamond. The work wasconducted to assist these firms better understandthe potential for encountering human remains onadjacent property, as well as their responsibilityshould human remains be encountered.

The study tract consists of what is locallyknown as the Monrovia Cemetery, whichencompasses 3.7 acres of land situated on theCharleston Neck, within the City of Charleston(see Figure 1). The cemetery is today bounded tothe north by a parcel owned by Resco Tower Co.and a subdivided tract owned by Industrial NeckPartnership. To the northwest is a tract owned byKenan Transport Co., while to the west is a parcelowned by Beazer East, Inc. All of these parcelsare industrial in nature, but are separated from thecemetery by a ditch and chain link fence. Accessto the cemetery is by way of Oceanic Street, afrontage road west of 1-26. The industrial parcelsare all accessed by Braswell Street, which runs offMeeting Street to the east (Figure 2).

Historically the industrial property to thenorth was occupied by the Ashepoo FertilizerCompany (also known as the Ashepoo PhosphateCompany, and later American AgriculturalChemical Company), which converted phosphaterock to commercial fertilizer. By the mid-twentiethcentury the phosphate industry had collapsed, butthe parcel was still heavily industrialized.

Trustees of the Monrovia Union CemeteryCompany purchased the tract to the south prior toany industrial development and created an AfricanAmerican cemetery in 1872. Successive trusteessold off portions of the cemetery to variousinterests, so that today only a small portion of theoriginal tract remains. Burials, however, likely datefrom the last quarter of the nineteenth centurythrough 2001.

Remediation of heavy metals in the soils

of some nearby tracts will be undertaken in thenear future. This work will involve removal anddisposal of contaminated soil from the industrialarea, as well as from the ditch which separatesthe cemetery from those tracts. In addition, theremay be some areas where soil will be added,rather than cut.

This study was undertaken to evaluate thepotential for these activities to encounter humanremains. One of the most critical questions, ofcourse, is whether burials are known to havetaken place off the cemetery property (or if theboundaries of that property have substantivelychanged through time). Equally important is theissue of the ditch and how much it may havemoved through time.

This investigation provides a briefhistorical synopsis, based on limited investigationsundertaken at the Charleston County Register ofMesne Conveyances, the Charleston CityArchives, and the South Carolina Department ofArchives and History. Inquiries were also madewith the Charleston County Preservation PlanningOffice, as well as with Ms. Alida S. Small, a localAfrican American researcher. An effort was alsomade to contact individuals currently involved inthe cemetery, based on three phone numberslisted on the cemetery's sign on Oceanic Street.The individual at one number today knows nothingof the cemetery, one number didn't answer, andthe third number is for the William Smith McNeillFuneral Home in Charleston.

There are additional lines of historicalresearch, including newspaper vertical files, citydirectories, and oral histories, which are beyondthe scope of the current work and which have notbeen explored.

In addition, while we did conduct a briefwalk-over of the cemetery, no intensive fieldinvestigation was conducted. The ditch itself isheavily cluttered with cemetery debris, includingflower arrangements, floral stands, grass

MONROVIA UNION CEMETERY

SCALE IN FEET

Figure 1. Project vicinity in the Charleston Neck area (basemap is USGS Charleston 1:24,000).

2

ENGINEERING. SURVEYING. '" PLANNING. INC.(1IlJ)",·t. .., .....lIllNu.l)tMt~tcIlIIoIt.CL/I~ 11'01

Z-i;0occ:o-i(5Z

SURVEYPREPARED fOR VRS

SAMPlING SITES ANQMONITORINC WELL AS-BUILl LOCA TlONS

TRACTS K. L. L-l. L-2. AND M-lBRASWELL STREET. CITY Of CHARLESTONCHARLESTON COUNTY. SOUTH CAROLINASCAlC: ," • $0' NO'of\lliltQ I', 2000

ICY5J(O, ,.LIO.I( " XlQ\

/

....-.... ~- ...

"11t. __,'--__ ._.._.--.~

"

BRASv.£Ll SlREEl R/W VARIES

,"~--":-.~::_~,-.:=~~\~~~~'~-~-~~'~" {f.,:-I'"

/' \ i:G-/' ,~;' il :,! ~~ I

'I 'u ,\ I: '\ \ '" :

.....I,/,,! r~.. : \ 1,1....,.5 ' ~ , \ ,:: \J _t_A ••••••---1 I II.

.' I ""\ "','\I \l"'~

) i ,~\

("'- ~. '~~"

.~.-> '-/.tU1.1 ..1'

\~\/ ./f,f\ .. ~;7

\,,_ ) tfb

--- ;.;-//

......''''.. I·..~.~.~:U

~):.~

i~~~i·· ~d~.: -ff",urt =:2 ~ I=:t ~ =-,r,::r R ~

..............~_•. I*..t_... ·_,.,_." .. ' _10._ ..1....,... ,,_ -.

UGI"p,

Z::::.'t':'M;IOIIU...

~ ~!~!~rt!:

a",,.,on,

-,

VJ

Fiaure 2. Monrovia Cemete URS Diamond

MONROVIA UNION CEMETERY

clippings, and tree limbs. It is also heavilyovergrown, so that only limited areas can beconveniently examined. It is possible that brokenstones, coping, and other cemetery related itemsmay be found in the ditch. It is also likely, giventhe heavy industrial activity throughout the area,that a penetrometer would be ineffective as a toolfor the discovery of graves. Even groundpenetrating radar would likely reveal a wide rangeof difficult to interpret anomalies.

The following sections briefly recount thehistory thus far collected for the cemetery, fieldobservations, and finally, recommendationsconcerning work in the cemetery area.

4

HISTORIC SYNOPSIS

In December 1872 a Charleston grocer,Albert Koennecke, sold a tract of land to fiveindividuals "as a Burial Place for the use andBenefit of a certain Association Known as theMonrovia Union Cemetery" for $8,000. The deedalso specifies that the individuals would "surrenderthe same to such person or persons as may fromtime to time be substituted in their place"(Charleston County RMC, DB J16, pg. 22).

The deed specifies that it was the "Farmof the late Dr. Tucker Harris" and was known asthe Harris Farm. It had been acquired byKoennecke from George R. Richards in 1860(Charleston County RMC, DB M14, pg. 31). Whilethe property was described as 16~ acres of highground and 17 acres of marsh, it appears that theproperty was subsequently caught up in someform of legal battle. An 1879 plat shows theKoennecke property "now subdivided so as toshow the portion of said farm proposed to beconveyed by the Master to Mr. W.L. Bradley, andalso the portion proposed to be released to Jas D.Price & others for the Monrovia Union CemeteryAssn. together with the rights of way through theCemetery to be retained by Mr. Bradley"(Charleston County RMC, PB C, pg. 8).

It appears that all of the marsh propertyoriginally deeded to the cemetery was acquired byBradley, as well as a substantial portion of thehigh ground property to the north and northeast ofthe cemetery (see Figure 3). The cemeteryretained a triangular shaped core at the edge ofhigh ground, bordering the marsh, as well as aconnected strip running northeast across SCRRright of way and terminating at the "Public Roadfrom Charleston" (today King Street).

The plat also identifies the MonroviaUnion property as "cemetery," suggesting thatburials may already have taken place on the tract.It also reveals a road running along the northeast,east and southeast edge of the parcel, andcontinuing west and north to the adjacentproperty. This is certainly the access road to

which Bradley retained right-of-way. It seemslikely that this is also part of the road which is stillpresent in the cemetery today. The onlysubstantive changes are that it no longer passesinto the property to the north and it has beenextended back to the northeast, forming a looproad around the cemetery parcel.

The plat also reveals that the northernboundary of the cemetery is clearly defined as aditch ("ditch the line"). This ditch appears toextend eastward to some drainage shown only asbeing bridged by the cemetery access road.

The initial trustees or directors includedJames F. Price, John M. Reid, Charles Bryan,Thomas R. Small, and William Thomas. While thisstudy did not search for these individuals in theCharleston City Directories, Charles Bryanappears in the 1870 Federal Census as a 73 yearold African American living on James Island, whileWilliam Thomas was a 33 year old mulatto livingin the Sixth Ward of Charleston. There wereseveral Thomas Smalls' listed in the census,including individuals living on Johns Island, theSixth Ward, St. James Goose Creek, the SeventhWard, and the Eighth Ward. Likewise, there weretwo individuals named James Price. One was a 23year old living on James Island, while the other, 28years old, lived in St. James Goose Creek.Additional work might help identify these originaldirectors.

This research, however, wasunsuccessful in identifying the group'sincorporation either in the Acts and JointResolutions of the General Assembly, whererecords from 1870 through 1879 were examined,or in the Charleston County, Clerk of Court,Petitions and Charters for Incorporation, whichdate from 1868 through 1898. It may be that theorganization was never formally incorporated.

At the time of the Civil War this portion ofthe Charleston Neck appears relatively rural.While Magnolia Cemetery was already active to

5

MO

NR

OV

IAU

NIO

NC

EM

ET

ER

Y

\\

\\\

co"E::JoUc:EC/lQ

)-.::ro.s=.U

6

2Q)

EQ)

uc:.Qc:::>ro.:;;ec:o~Q

)

£-- oCil0::C'?~::J

u:

HISTORIC SYNOPSIS

., .0'

Figure 4. Portion of the ca. 1864 Map of the Defences 0

Charleston CityandHarbor (National Archives RG77. Ma1-56-1, scale 1"=2,500').

industrial activities to the north,variously identified as the AshepooFertilizer Company, the AshepooPhosphate Company and, in the earlytwentieth century, the AmericanAgriCUltural Chemical Company, thevarious maps provide no detail on thecemetery. The 1884 map shows afence around the plant site, althoughthis fence appears to be set northwardof the ditch, suggesting that there maybe some vacant ground adjacent tothe cemetery (Figure 6).

Meanwhile, the MonroviaUnion Cemetery Company disposedof portions of its holdings four times inthe first quarter of the twentiethcentury. In 1907 its directors, thenlisted as William Edwards, N.W.Small, W.W. Rodolph, Edward G.Campfield. and H.J. Chisholm, sold aright-of-way to the Charleston andSummerville Electric RailwayCompany for $500 (CharlestonCounty RMC. DB H25. pg. 137). Thistract, situated toward the eastern edgeof the parcel, ran north-northeast ­south-southwest.

the east, the only activity of note on the Ashleywas "Racker Mills," which appears to be in closeproximity to what would become MonroviaCemetery (Figure 4).

Regardless, the property to the north wasvery quickly dominated by the Ashepoo FertilizerCompany, which took over the lands previouslyawarded to W.L. Bradley. Figure 5 is an undatedplat of the Ashepoo Fertilizer Company found inthe McCrady Plats. It not only shows the sameroad network present in the cemetery shown inthe 1879 plat, but reveals that the road to themarsh had been extended to a recently createdisland. The road is also extended northwardacross the boundary ditch. The ditch itself is stillpresent and, coupled with the access road,appears to still form the northern boundary of thecemetery.

The Sanborn Insurance Maps providerelatively little assistance. While showing the

In 1911 the cemetery directors divestedthemselves of another strip of property, again onthe eastern edge, for $3,000. This parcel was soldby the new directors, E.G. Campbell, W.W.Rodolph, H.J. Chisholm, M.F. Levy, and H.W.Small, to the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad(Charleston County RMS, DB Y25, pg. 80).

Additional property was sold the followingyear, 1912, to Ludwig Redinger for $1,200(Charleston County RMC, DB N26, pg. 139). Thedirectors in this transaction are the same as theprevious year. This parcel is the eastern portion ofthe original tract, butting to the north on AshepooRoad, a private road leading to the fertilizer plant,east on Meeting Street, and west on the previousrailroad rights-of-way.

In 1925 another tract, of 0.053 acre wasgranted to Charleston County for use by KingStreet Extension Sanitary and DrainageCommission in exchange for $1,200. The directors

7

s:oZ::0

~»czozoms:!!lm~

(~I

'I4t

::A"....."" ... , , ~.,.,-.....~,.....;~ ....,,4-, -,-

.oUlIIJIPOO,.~ Iro.

.-----..""__ •. rAY".II."'''''_;t:);.~:e

emeteMonrovia Union C

/-I. W.K/NaMIINorI.RND

"'-J

')... ~. .

H JliI R _ ~_ ... _J _ _~,~~ __ _ ~~_~.A_A~~- _A_

,"" "".' .....,.__ .~-::'""'-"-, ....,---_. - ..-' --"'" \., {".,l ~ .... " ~ 'C.' . •C'- .',1,"""""""" '" /II.. ' ,__,,,_,,,, [....... . ~/' . IIl·L

t : ~'V \ -..., \ ~ ....\ l' I)", ,._j" \.J { • •

" .. ' ., ~ " ....~,,': .. -;::-_~ _~c....==.-=- . .•• , '" 1 ,: Ioi. _. .;;:;.=:=-....:;~." .... .. .., I •:;:' .., ., -~~"'';~''J ........ ' _. /,( ,;11; .. I!: ::;, '_ . L-" ,;/>,'

- . ~' .;==~ .... . _.~~"","';;;:::~b"~""""" ,i / .~4~ /!- ._.~ ~. ...;- .. '" ",..., ..¢ ••u :J>: .._--. ~!~ .. ,... ..~. .•. .." 1" Ioc. /7 .~_" ...;;;..___ /; ':' l!~(

;T. ..•••". -'.,. ' "/-'

- • - """---, ,. ~I.~''. .._... , _-== ., "7=-::--. . __"._... / i J :7ri , , _. ~~/ 1I,l/,j;

f

'._ 't' . DLC/llftP LIIND I;i ~!/ '

I' ' • ",-.' I ",.,,j><'1'-1-:,)t ~ "~~ I .. /l;~i If

• . I ....":' ,::'. . " . . .' '.. . ' .. '"'-'''~ .

~_J- ... .....oO""",,....,,~•.~ "..... ~ Id· "~L ~~ "._.r"..·~..""·.:;;;;M~",, ......"" U> 1 I,' tI~f . f·...-// ' •••_..... .... "/II..' v

. ....~..- ..,.. "-' .- .. - .."""""." ;' .'.,.' ....------ .

co

HIS

TO

RIC

SY

NO

PS

IS

c:roEoUc:.~.crJ)

-:tcoco- oro:2:CDuc:ttl~::lrJ)

E~i.i:c:~o.0c:ttl(/)

<0~::l

i.i:9

MONROVIA UNION CEMETERY

,,

-:;'4- ., ~~ \\ /.~-:;

/;~~~~ -~~";~~

if SUi.:Ii.~

f'Figure 7. Portion of the 1919 USGS Charleston

topographic map showing the cemetevicinity (scale is 1:21,1200).

by this time included only H.J. Chisholm, W.W.Rodolph, and James H. Rodolph (CharlestonCounty RMC, DB Z30, pg. 296).

While research did not extend past 1925,it appears that through time the entire access stripwas sold, leaving the cemetery with only thecentral core adjacent to the marsh. The amount ofloss can be easily seen by comparing Figures 2and 3. Whether burials were present on this stripis unclear, although it does appear that the oldestportion of the cemetery is the eastern half wherefew stones are present. It is possible that someburials are found beyond the current boundariesto the east, toward 1-26 and Meeting Street.

The first USGS topographic map, shownin Figure 7, shows the cemetery in 1919 asconfined to the current tract. To the north is theAmerican Agricultural Chemical Company'sAshepoo Plant, to the west is marsh, and to thesouth is a road (probably the same boundary andaccess road shown in the original plat). To theeast are several structures, as well as a largeneighborhood - all apparently on the varioustracts sold off by the cemetery's directors. A 1923map prepared by the Port Utilities Commission

10

shows essentially the same situation.

The 1943 USGS topographic map showsdramatic industrial developmentto the north oftheAshepoo plant, as well as considerable expansionin the immediate plant area. The cemetery,however, is in the same location and is shown ashaving the same size and shape. The 1943 mapdoes show the western cemetery road crossingthe ditch and extending north, into the Ashepooplant site. It also shows a larger number ofstructures just beyond the cemetery, to the east(Figure 8).

The aerial photographs readily available.for the project area are limited and generally ofpoor quality. Nevertheless, the 1949 aerial revealsa well defined road network in the cemetery.These roads appear to be identical to thoseshown on the 1879 plat (Figure 3), except thatthey form a complete loop (Figure 9). The aerialalso suggests that while most of the cemetery isgrassed, perhaps heavily, there is much bareearth in the northern corner or quadrant. Themeaning of this is not at all clear. In addition, theditch line is well defined, although clearly woodedor at least vegetated. Beyond the ditch is cleared

+

Figure 8. Portion of the 1943 USGS Charlestontopographic map showing the cemete(scale is 1:25,000).

HISTORIC SYNOPSIS

Figure 9. 1949 aerial photograph of the cemetearea.

industrial property. This suggests that at least by1949 it would be unlikely that any burials weretaking place north of the ditch, regardless offencing. In fact, it's likely that much of thisseemingly open area was actually the remains ofAshepoo Road and the laborers' houses which

1:.;4;:,~

/t:/~.:.~~,. .' ,~~

( ..~ <~ .- .

Figure 10. 1967 aerial photograph of the cemetearea.

had been constructed during the last quarter ofthe nineteenth century. The southwest corner ofthe wood frame acid chamber building is in closeproximity to the cemetery. Earlier (see Figure 6),the pyrite storage building was immediately on thenorth side of the ditch - further reducing thelikelihood for burials being present (or at leastpreserved) beyond the modern limits of thecemetery.

There was little change into the 1960s.One of the best aerial photographs, from 1967,reveals that the acid chamber building is stillstanding, just a short distance from the northerntip of the ditch. The cemetery road is still welldefined, although the extensive disturbance in thenorthern quadrant of the cemetery is no longervisible - suggesting that the entire area wasgrassed by this time (Figure 10). By this time 1-26was constructed.

No significant changes to the cemeteryare immediately obvious through the 1982 aerial.At that time the property is still well defined to thenorth by the ditch. The marsh to the west issomewhat less well defined, possibly the result oflowering sea levels and industrial dumping.

11

12

MONROVIA UNION CEMETERY

CURRENT CONDITION

The cemetery is today accessed by wayof Oceanic Street, a frontage road for 1-26. The

chained gate which was open at the time of thisinspection. Given the condition of the padlocks it

seems unlikely that the gates arefrequently closed.

Within the chain link fencethere is a second entrance consistingof eMU gate posts supporting a castiron gate, although it, too, is unlikely toever be closed. The road is a singletravel lane with asphalt paving. Someevidence of an earlier road is found tothe north or right of the entrance(Figure 12). Beyond is a large areawith no markings. Walking this area,however, there are subtle topographicvariations suggesting that graves arelikely present, but unmarked.

In the northern quadrant of thecemetery there is a noticeable rise,about 2 to 3 feet in height (Figure 13;see also Figure 2). The area is heavilydominated by twentieth century vaultburials (burials where a concrete vault

entrance ismarked by afaded andsomewhatdilapidatedsign (Figure11). Only oneof the threep h 0 n enumbersshown on thesign appearsto still beassociatedwith thecemetery.There is achain linkfence justbeyond theroad and a Figure 12. View of the cemetery from the entrance looking west.

13

MONROVIA UNION CEMETERY

Figure 13. View of the rise in the northwestern quadrant of the cemetery looking west

Plantings are common in the cemetery,inclUding ground covers as well as larger plants.Grave goods, including containers and variousceramic figurines, are also found on a number of

Concrete markers are not common,although at least one whitewashed concrete crossis present, associated with canna lilies. There areseveral individual graves which are fenced. In onecase the fencing is pipe railing set into granitecorner posts. In another case, cast iron ra.ilingsections have been used to created somethingresembling a bedstead or cradle grave marker.Individual graves are also often marked with lowwire or picket fences (much of this fencingmaterial is found discarded in the ditch).

Thecemeteryincludes a

range of marker types. While dies on bases and,more recently, vault markers are common, thereare also some evidencing greater age. There arecommercial headstones from the nineteenthcentury, although they are generally of thinmarble, lightly carved. These stones are heavilyworn, with the inscription often illegible. In somecases the marble itself is badly sugaring or evenspalling. One unusual marker is a marble tabletop, which has been commercially carved on itsreverse side and used as a headstone.

is used as the flush to ground marker). A recentlyopened grave reveals that this rise or mound isartificial, consisting of lensed soil (Figure 14). It islikely that this rise and its associated activities arewhat are so clearly seen in the 1949 aerial. It is,however, uncertain whether this represents fill soilbrought into the cemetery specifically to raise thelevel of the ground in this area, or whether itrepresents spoil from graves which was dumpedin this one area and spread out. Regardless, itappears to be relatively modern and the soil doesnot appear to contain any industrial material, anymucked soils, or phosphate debris. In otherwords,it appears to originate with the cemetery.

A brief examination of the ditch revealsthat it varies from about 4 to 6 feet in width,gradually tapering to the east. It is about 5 feet indepth. Today it is choked with vegetation; whilethe cemetery grounds appear to be periodicallymowed, there seems to be no maintenance of theditch or its banks. In addition, the area has at leastrecently been used for disposal of flowerarrangements, wire stands, styrofoam, and othercemetery-related debris. Also noticed were anumber of areas where cement had been dumpedover the edge, likely remnants of mix used insetting modern markers. At least one stonefragment (likely a section of either coping or a

stone fencepost) was foundin the ditch.Regrettably it isnot uncommonto find suchmaterialsdiscarded onthe edge ofcemeteries.They representmaterials whichhave eitherbecome brokenor which werein the way ofbackhoes usedto excavategraves.

14

CURRENT CONDITION

Figure 14. Lensed soil of the rise exposed in a recently opened grave shaft.

relatively modern graves. Several graves werealso found intentionally mounded up - a relativelyold practice among African Americans. Thesemounded graves are also in areas where no grassis growing and the area is covered with sand.

There are also a number of monitoringwells placed in the cemetery, along the edge ofthe ditch or marsh lines. At the southwesternedge of the cemetery there is a cargo containerwhich is being used to store grave side items,such as chairs, carpet, and a lifter.

The examination of the ditch did notreveal any obvious intrusive graves, although littleof the ditch was actually visible. The inspection,however, did reveal that clearly marked graveswere present with several yards of the ditch. It isalso possible that the area to the east containsunmarked graves.

15

16

MONROVIA UNION CEMETERY

RECOMMENDATIONS

This brief historical review found that theMonrovia Union Cemetery was organized in 1872and that burials were likely made in the propertyby 1879 when a plat was prepared and the actualsize of the cemetery was somewhat reduced fromthe original deed.

SUbsequently the cemetery continued toshrink in size, with portions to the east being soldoff by the directors of the organization. In fact, inthe first quarter of the twentieth century theorganization made over $5,400 from the

. disposition of relatively small pieces. Additionalsales likely took place throughout the remainder ofthe twentieth century, to the point where thecemetery stabilized at about 3.7 acres. Given thecurrent evidence it is uncertain whether any of theportions of the original grant which have beendisposed of contained burials. Given theextraordinary development of the area, anyremains which might have been present areunlikely to survive today.

It seems likely, given the topography, thatthe current eastern portion of the cemetery parcelcontains some burials. Very few graves in thisarea are marked. In fact, there are relatively fewnineteenth and early twentieth century markedgraves, suggesting that a number of the earlygraves were impermanently marked, perhapsusing wooded markers.

One relatively stable feature of thecemetery, however, is the ditch. It is shown in theearliest plat and continues to be visible on aerialphotographs throughout the mid- to late-twentiethcentury. More than any fence, this ditch was likelythe boundary for burials. Beyond the ditch therewas historically very intensive industrial activity.The combination of a clearly defined neighbor, aswell as a clearly demarcated boundary makes itseems unlikely that burials would have crossedthe line.

We have been told that this ditch hasmoved somewhat over time. The quality of the

aerial photographs available to us did not allowany detailed assessment of this statement. Thus,while it seems unlikely that burials would haveever extended northward of the ditch, we cannotverify that the ditch location has remained stable.

With enhancement it might be possible touse historic aerial photographs to evaluate thepotential for significant ditch movement, althoughnone of the available historic photographs haveanything approaching 1-meter resolution.Moreover, the industrial activities have sosignificantly changed the topography andcompaction of the soils to the north of the ditchthat it is unlikely that either a penetrometer surveyor even ground penetrating radar would be able toidentify anomalies.

Consequently, our best recommendationis that all ground disturbing activities within 30 feetof the ditch be carefully monitored for anyevidence of bones, coffin parts, or other unusualfeatures. In particular all work within the ditchshould be very carefully conducted, removing onlylimited quantities of soil at a time. This should becoupled with careful visual inspection for anyrectangular stains which might represent graveshafts. Again, any identification of bone, wood, ormetal fragments from the ditch area should betreated as potential graves and further evaluated.

We also recommend against any fillactivities associated with the ditch. While thecurrent plans suggest that the cemetery limits, insome areas, are south of the ditch, this does notseem consistent with the historic evidence.Consequently, even fill activities have the potentialto alter the nature of the cemetery and potentiallydisturb burials.

We recommend that Chicora be consultedshould any unusual features (such as rectangularstains), coffin parts (such as wood or ironfragments, handles, or other unusual materials),or bones be encountered. We have the ability toidentify the materials and determine if they do, in

17

MONROVIA UNION CEMETERY

fact, represent human remains or coffin parts.

We are not attorneys and cannot offerlegal advice. However, if such items are found, we.recommend that all land disturbing activities in theimmediate vicinity should immediately cease.Initially the Charleston County Coroner must benotified. The coroner will determine if the remainsrepresent a possible forensic case (i.e., a crimescene). In some cases the coroner will assertcontrol over remains found in likely associationwith a cemetery. If they do not, we thenrecommend contacting the State Archaeologistwith the S.C. Institute of Archaeology andAnthropology. This individual has assumedjurisdiction over human remains for which thecoroner takes no responsibility.

Regardless of who assumes jurisdiction,it is unlikely that any further work will be allowedwithin the boundary of the area assumed tocontain human remains. Those remains whichhave been uncovered will need to be collected forreburial. The process of collection should beconducted by a forensic anthropologist who isfamiliar with the nature ofhistoric skeletal remains.Under South Carolina law it will be necessary tohave a funeral director present during therecovery process. Once all remains have beencollected, they will be turned over to the funeraldirector, who will make arrangements for reburial.

The cost of the collection and subsequentreburial must be borne by URS Diamond and/orConoco. While not specifically an "abandonedcemetery" it is likely that the handling of anyidentified remains would come under Section 27­43-10 etseq. of the South Carolina Code of Laws,as amended ("Removal of AbandonedCemeteries").

Failure to follow these steps would likelysubject the contractor to the provisions of Section16-17-600, South Carolina Code of Laws, asamended ("Destruction or Desecration of HumanRemains or Repositories ThereoF). Violation ofthis section is a felony and, upon conviction,individuals are subject to fines of no more than$5,000 or imprisonment of not more than fiveyears.

18

Cemetery Preservation Plans

Historical Research

Identification of Grave Locations and Mapping

Condition Assessments

Treatment of Stone and Ironwork

Chicora Foundation, Inc. PO Box 8664 ▪ 861 Arbutus Drive Columbia, SC 29202-8664 Tel: 803-787-6910 Fax: 803-787-6910 www.chicora.org