The reaction of the citizens in complaining against the ordinance was as swift as the action of council had been in passing it. One letter which appeared in the Ohio State Journal is illustrative of the feelings of the people and also shows that the Council had acted in such haste, without the advice of its attorney, that the ordinance may have been easily overturned in court:

When the old burying ground was laid out into lots, a good many years ago, most of the older citizens purchased burying places there, paid their money, and received conveyences from the city. Ever since that time, many of them have been looking at that spot, and taking pains with it, as for their final resting place along with kindred and friends already sleeping there a little before them.

Now, if those of us who still remain behind are to be prohibited from being buried there, by the present City Council, it certainly would be a very kind thing in that wise body to tell us where we really shall be buried at last, and what we may do with the lots the City Council sold us, and still hold our money for.

The City Solicitor [James A. Wilcox] is absent, and his views are said to be unknown; but that this late so-called ORDINANCE is a mere nullity, and that all persons, rich and poor, high and low, may, if they choose, avoid the inconvenience and expense of other cemeteries, and still go on and bury their dead in peace, without let or hindrance, in their own lots, up in the Old Burying Ground, is the very clear opinion of the

CITY SOLICITOR'S FATHER³⁹

The writer was Yale-educated Phineas B. Wilcox (1790-1863), who "was for more than forty years one of the foremost lawyers, standing in the front rank with the great legal lights of that period in Ohio."⁴⁰ A bill to repeal the ordinance was introduced on August 4 and passed on August 18th.

Subsequent to the defeat of this move for closure, those seeking the retention and improvement of the ground moved forward again. On October 13 the petition of Stanton Sholes, "praying a further protection of the North Graveyard by putting around the same, a stone wall, or iron fence," was presented to council. Superintendent Noble reported in favor of the action, if funds could be found without using tax money.⁴¹ The sale of lots had been continued after passage of the repealing ordinance in 1856, the last deed on record at the Court House bearing the date of October 30, 1857, but the remaining lots were too few for their sale to generate any substantial amount of money. The proposed improvement apparently was never made, though a considerable expense of $301.91 was incurred in the year ending April 20

20