slavery - Chestertown Spy

Easton Historic District Commission Unanimously OKs Removal of Confederate Monument from Talbot Courthouse Grounds

October 12, 2021 by John Griep

Easton’s historic district commission voted unanimously Monday night to allow the removal of the Confederate monument from the county courthouse square.

The Easton Historic District Commission voted 7-0 in favor of a certificate of appropriateness that will allow Talbot County to remove and relocate the monument.

Commission members noted the town’s historic district guidelines have little guidance on statues, but a national historical preservation organization supports removal of Confederate monuments from public spaces.

The monument outside the entrance to the Talbot County Court House is believed to be the last Confederate monument on public property in Maryland.

Attorney Dan Saunders, representing Talbot County, said a majority of the Talbot County Council had determined it was in the best interest for public health, safety, and welfare to move the monument from the courthouse grounds

“The statue is on county land. It is controversial. It is divisive sadly,” Saunders said. “And it is hurtful to certain citizens of the county. So the county council has made this determination…. They are the elected officials charged with making that kind of public policy decision. And it would not be inappropriate for this body to give some deference to their thought process….”

“Because it’s controversial, it needs to be someplace where people can choose to go see it or choose not to go see it, not in a place where they have to go see it in order to conduct the business that is conducted at the courthouse,” he said.

Three residents spoke against removing the statue.

Lynn Mielke said statues for Talbot County’s Confederate and U.S. troops were erected in 1884 and 1888, respectively, at Culp’s Hill at the Gettysburg battlefield.

After the county’s Civil War veterans visited Gettysburg in 1913 for the 50th anniversary of the battle — and no doubt saw the two statues, Mielke said — efforts began to raise funds for Confederate and Union monuments at the courthouse.

The Confederate monument was funded and built; the Union one was not but a new fundraising effort is underway for such a monument, she said.

A rendering of a proposed monument to Talbot County residents who fought for the United States during the Civil War. The proposal also would include informational plaques about Talbot County’s role in the Civil War.

“108 years later a group, Build the Union Talbot Boys, has investigated, designed, and begun to raise money for a Union Talbot Boys companion monument to complement the Talbot Boys in gray monument, with informational plaques, to make a complete statement on the courthouse lawn about Talbot County’s unique role in the Civil War, (including) the Talbot Boys, the Union Talbot Boys, the USCT (United States Colored Troops), including the Unionville 18, and Frederick Douglass,” Mielke said.

“The Talbot Boys memorial is is not a memorial to traitors,” Mielke said. “And it is not a memorial to non-veterans.”

Clive Ewing noted that the town’s historic district booklet includes two photos of the Confederate monument.

He said the county council’s resolution removing the monument only refers to the statue and argued that language doesn’t include the monument’s base.

David Montgomery, president of Preserve Talbot History, said moving the monument 200 miles away “to a battlefield in the Shenandoah Valley” does not help tell the story of Talbot County’s divided loyalties during the Civil War.

Commissioner Grant Mayhew said the historic district commission should look at guidance from the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

The National Trust issued a statement about Confederate monuments after the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer sparked protests “in support of racial justice and equity.”

In its June 18, 2020, statement, the National Trust said:

“This nationwide call for racial justice and equity has brought renewed attention to the Confederate monuments in many of our communities. The National Trust for Historic Preservation has previously issued statements about the history and treatment of Confederate monuments, emphasizing that, although some were erected — like other monuments to war dead — for reasons of memorialization, most Confederate monuments were intended to serve as a celebration of Lost Cause mythology and to advance the ideas of white supremacy. Many of them still stand as symbols of those ideologies and sometimes serve as rallying points for bigotry and hate today. To many African Americans, they continue to serve as constant and painful reminders that racism is embedded in American society.

“We believe it is past time for us, as a nation, to acknowledge that these symbols do not reflect, and are in fact abhorrent to, our values and to our foundational obligation to continue building a more perfect union that embodies equality and justice for all. We believe that removal may be necessary to achieve the greater good of ensuring racial justice and equality.

“And their history needs not end with their removal: we support relocation of these monuments to museums or other places where they may be preserved so that their history as elements of Jim Crow and racial injustice can be recognized and interpreted.

“We recognize that not all monuments are the same, and a number of communities have carefully and methodically determined that some monuments should be removed and others retained but contextualized with educational markers or other monuments designed to counter the false narrative and racist ideology that they represent, providing a deeper understanding of their message and their purpose.

“Our view, however, is that unless these monuments can in fact be used to foster recognition of the reality of our painful past and invite reconciliation for the present and the future, they should be removed from our public spaces.”

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Council Votes to Move Talbot Boys, But Fight May Not Be Over

September 15, 2021 by John Griep

Although the county council voted 3-2 Tuesday night to move the Confederate statue on the courthouse grounds to a Civil War national historic district near Harrisonburg, Va., advocates for keeping the monument at its current location, or at least in Talbot County, say the fight is not over.

During public comments near the end of Tuesday night’s meeting, Preserve Talbot History’s president said the foundation that leads the preservation efforts at the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District said in a Tuesday afternoon letter that it would only accept Talbot’s monument “if it will not and cannot stay safely here.

“They’re not welcoming this statue as something ‘Oh, this is fantastic, we always wanted to have the Talbot boys statue in the corner here,'” David Montgomery said. “They’re taking it because they’ve been assured that we’re going to tear it down, melt it, or put it in a warehouse. Those are their conditions. That should have been made clear to the council when this proposal was set up to vote….”

The Sept. 14 letter from the executive director of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation says the foundation’s position is that monuments should remain in their original location whenever possible and that an attempt should be made to relocate the monument in Talbot County if it is removed from its current location. If the monument must be moved out of the county, the foundation said it remained “committed to its offer to become its permanent steward….”

According to the email headers The Spy has viewed, the letter was emailed at 3:49 p.m. Tuesday and sent to all five county council members. The Spy does not know when it was actually received by the council members, whose meeting Tuesday night began at 6 p.m. with the discussion of the administrative resolutions concerning the Confederate monument beginning at about 6:37 p.m.

The full text of the foundation’s letter is below:

Talbot Boys Monument

The letter refers to the foundation’s monument policy, which is posted on its website:

SVBFMonumentPolicy

Montgomery also challenged the process by which the relocation vote had occurred.

“(T)his was done in such a surreptitious manner, that won’t be forgotten,” he said. “A policy decision like this should not be made through a procedural maneuver that eliminates not only public comment, (but also) the time for this council to review thoroughly, to know what the battlefield … looks like, to know what the arrangements are for moving it, to know how that can be done safely, even to know whether the base is going to go along with it or not. All that’s missing…. No matter what the legal cover… this was a fundamental policy decision.”

Montgomery said sincere efforts should be made “…to find a place in Talbot County for this memorial … if this council is determined to take it out of its current place.

“I hope the move the monument will support that objective. They’ve said all along that all they want to do is move the monument and find another place in Talbot County for it,” he said.

Lynn Mielke, who has supported keeping the monument at its current location, said she has been involved in the issue since 2015.

“And I would suggest that it’s not over yet,” she said.

Mielke said her main reason to speak Tuesday night, however, was to share “… an observation that I’ve made over those years, as well as tonight. That observation is of the residents of Talbot County. And how no one’s come and torn down the monument. No one has defaced it or put paint on it. It’s been courteous and … the protests for its removal is very consistent with what the founding fathers had saw in terms of peaceful protest and sharing opinions.

“Tonight, for instance, there were the Move the Monument people and there were the Preserve Talbot County history people (outside the courthouse). And everyone was courteous to everyone else…,” she said. “The Move the Monument people were handing out snacks to everyone. And I guess it sort of reminded me of, if you read the history of Culp’s Hill, the Battle of Culps Hill, where we had Talbot Countians both on the Confederate side and on the Union side fighting each other. But when the battle was over, they helped each other.

“The battle here is not quite over but I would hope that until it is, and even when it is, that each side will respect the other and show them that grace that I observed tonight and I have observed over the last few years,” Mielke said.

The Confederate monument on the Talbot County courthouse grounds. Photo by John Griep.

Others had harsher words for Frank Divilio, Pete Lesher, and Corey Pack, the three councilmen who voted for the resolution to relocate the statue.

Michelle Ewing called Divilio “duplicitous” and said “… thanks to you and Corey (Pack) and Pete (Lesher) our county will forever be divided.”

Clive Ewing agreed.

“Obviously, I’m disappointed in how the council went about advancing the Talbot Boys resolution to a vote tonight,” he said. “Transparent government is the best government and you have left a lot to be desired.

“This action does nothing to advance understanding and unity in this county,” Ewing said.

Shari Wilcoxon said “… this is a very sad day for Talbot County to be swept up in the same horrific Marxist idealism that’s going on throughout our country…. It’s really a frightening step, it’s frightening what’s going on in our country, and it’s a sad day that’s going on here in Talbot County….”

Speakers who supported efforts to move the statue from the courthouse grounds said it took courage to make that decision.

“I saw an awful lot of courage here tonight, tremendous courage, because it takes a great deal of courage to have a change of heart,” Keith Watts said.

“You talked about respect, and being respectful. And I think it’s so important for the community, whatever the outcome was tonight, to continue to respect each other. Because we all live together,” he said. “There are certainly individual acts of courage on each and every single person’s part that’s here tonight, both in the audience and on that dais…. I think that you can take some solace in the fact that you did what you felt was in your hearts.

“Whether I agree with that, or not, it doesn’t matter so much as to continue to look at each other, listen to each other, and respect each other because we all live together,” Watts said. “And I think we all, in our own ways, have Talbot County’s best interests at heart. Always…. So thank you for your candor. Thank you for your courage. Thank you for bringing us to this point. And thank you for leading us from here because now it’s the way forward.”

Richard Potter, president of the Talbot County NAACP, thanked Divilio.

“Thank you for your courage tonight. I appreciate that. I appreciate you and your diligence in trying to find a peaceful solution to this issue,” he said. “I know tonight was difficult. And I’m pretty sure the days ahead will be difficult. But that’s leadership.

“One of the quotes that I leave this council with is one from Winston Churchill: ‘Mountaintops inspire leaders, but valleys mature them.'”

The NAACP and others had filed a federal lawsuit to require the county to move the Confederate monument from its position on the lawn just outside the Talbot County Court House.

Divilio said he submitted the resolution to relocate the statue to the Cross Keys battlefield to put an end to the divisive debate and to ensure the monument is preserved.

“If the Talbot boys make this move, they will help tell the story of the Civil War and how communities and families were divided, unfortunately, much as we are today,” he said. “Cross Keys battlefield is an appropriate new home for the Talbot boys where the monument will be cared for with respect, and be part of the teaching history for generations to come.

“Throughout this process, it has been very important to me that the Talbot Boys be treated with respect,” Divilio said. “And if the decision was made to move it, there needed to be a new location identified that would be able to keep it and maintain it for the long term. Unfortunately, no such option existed locally and I feared the situation would evolve much like it has in other parts of this country and the courthouse grounds would be vandalized and the Talbot Boys would be destroyed.

He said the simple answer to questions about why the statue is being moved out of the county is that “no one wanted it. No one wanted to subject themselves, their business, their organization, or their government to the backlash from agreeing to accept the Talbot Boys on their property.

“The Talbot Boys issue has divided our community for too long and has sidelined many other important things the county council and county government needs to address,” Divilio said. “I believe that moving the Talbot Boys to a historically appropriate place of respect, and allowing our community to move forward is the best for Talbot County. It is time to bring this resolution to a close so we can shift our focus to rebuilding our relationships and coming together to build a 21st century Talbot County.”

Council Vice President Pete Lesher commended Divilio, who has previously voted to leave the monument at its current location, for his “diligence in identifying and securing an honorable and appropriate destination for the statute.

“For generations, the voices of Talbot County’s African-Americans were unheard and ignored too often,” Lesher said. “Now that they have allies across racial, ethnic and economic divides, we are beginning to hear them and give them new respect. It is clear that the presence of this statute on the courthouse square would continue to rankle. Tonight’s move is simply overdue.

“The monument is a misrepresentation of history, suggesting an inflated number of Talbot County residents fought against Maryland and against the United States in America’s new birth of freedom,” he said. “In fact, Talbot County voted overwhelmingly for pro-Union candidates to a potential secession convention that never met. This monument is simply not good history.

“And this statue shows a young Confederate soldier, not in surrender, but going off to war in his fresh uniform to fight a lost cause,” Lesher said. “In this Excelsior portrayal from Longfellow’s poem, he is ennobled, heroically prepared to give his life to preserve a way of life that was economically sustained through enslaved black labor.

Councilman Corey Pack agreed and noted the primary goal of the Confederacy was to maintain slavery.

“(W)e may not know individually why those men went to fight, perhaps because their friend down the street was going off to fight, perhaps because they were bored, perhaps because they truly believed in what the Confederacy stood far, we don’t know. But what we do know is the overarching umbrella that the Confederacy stood for,” he said. “And that was most notably the enslavement of black people. And no matter how you cut it, had the Confederacy won, that would have continued on. Written within the documents of their articles of confederacy is for the continuation of slavery….

“So we know what the Confederacy stood for. And these statues that came about at the turn of the 20th century was basically to glamorize that lost cause movement of the Confederacy, that although they fought and lost, they fought for a noble cause.

“I believe this is the right thing for Talbot County, I really do, I really do,” Pack said. “I believe that this is not erasing history, it’s just relocating a statue to another location where it can live out its days and if persons want to go travel and see it at that location, they’re free to do so. But to have the statute out front, that glamorizes a time and a period with not everybody who’s free, to have a statue out front, which still has the the draped flag of the Confederacy, to have that CSA on the buckle of that young man. And knowing what that stood for is not appropriate for this date and time.”

Councilwoman Laura Price had a competing resolution drafted calling for a Union statue and the names of Union soldiers to be added to the existing Confederate monument. But she said Tuesday night that she would not be offering that administrative resolution because she felt the public should be allowed to comment at a public hearing.

“Moving it out of the county is one thing, moving it out of the state is quite another,” she said. “And as I stated, the reason that I’m delaying my resolution is because it does deserve public feedback. And there are some people out there who maybe are supportive of moving the monument, but don’t support moving it to Virginia.

“I would ask you to have a proper public hearing and let people talk about (it). You’re the only one who looked and you alone are deciding to move to Virginia,” Price said. “And I think there’s a lot of people who would be supportive of moving the monument that don’t want it to go to Virginia. So I do have a problem with that….

“I’d much rather have compromise and try to … figure out if we can do another solution. But if this is going to be the solution that passes here, the people, all of the people deserve a proper public hearing…,” she said. “I believe that this is wrong. And it’s not anything to do with my opinion, whether it should stay as is, become a unity, or go, has nothing to do with that, it has everything to do with process.”

Council President Chuck Callahan noted Divilio had had a change of heart on the issue but “I can tell you I’m not there.

“I feel it’s a mistake. I think it’s a mistake, moving it from here,” he said. “I’ve always been very open minded. And I’ve told everybody I’ve been open-minded through the years, you know, could we find a place, could we find a place? I’ve always really been open minded to listen to everybody….

“You know, if we were going to move it, I would love to have the opportunity for the public to have input on where we’re going to put it,” Callahan said. “I really do, I think it’s important…. So I really feel like … if we were to make that decision that this is gonna move, it would have been really great if the public had the opinion on where it was going to be moved at.”

Pack took some issue with Callahan’s remarks about giving the public an opportunity to speak.

“I just want to say for clarification, you know, we’ve had opportunities to engage the public….,” Pack said, referring to requests from the Talbot NAACP and religious leaders to meet with the council to discuss the issue. “We’ve had opportunities to engage the public. We’ve turned down invitations to engage the public.

“Our attorneys from Baltimore City, high-powered attorneys that come consult this council, (said we should) engage the public, and we chose not to,” he said. “So you can’t say to this man now you’re (not) going about (it) the right way because you didn’t include the public. We had opportunities to do so. And the majority chose not to. That’s not fair to now say to him, he hasn’t engaged in the public. When you had opportunity to do it, we did not.

“That’s your opinion,” Callahan replied.

“That’s a fact,” Pack said.

It was unclear whether the approved resolution only provides for the relocation of the statue of the young Confederate soldier atop the base or to the entirety of the monument including statue and base. The resolution as drafted and approved Tuesday night solely refers to the Talbot boys “statue,” and never mentions the word “monument,” but council members spoke about the “monument” when discussing the resolution. The dedication “To the Talbot Boys” appears on the base.

In a Wednesday afternoon email, Divilio indicated his intention with the resolution was to relocate “all of it.”

The draft administrative resolution may be read in its entirety below.

DRAFT_Administrative_Resolution_-_Relocation_of_Talbot_Boys_Statue_-_September_2021

Key moments from Tuesday night’s discussion may be seen in the below video, which is about eight minutes long. A full video of the county council meeting may be viewed and/or downloaded at https://talbotcountymd.gov/About-Us/County_Council/council-meeting-video.

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Confederate Monument Focus of Public Comments as Talbot Council Returns to In-Person Meetings

June 16, 2021 by John Griep

This video is about 38 minutes long.

Although a federal judge may have the final say, advocates for moving the Confederate monument from the courthouse lawn and those who want it to remain voiced their opinions Tuesday night, June 8.

The issue has been the predominant topic of public comments over the past year as the Talbot County Council met virtually during the COVID-19 pandemic and remained so for the council’s first in-person meeting in more than a year.

For those who want to Move Talbot’s Confederate Monument, the monument honors a failed, traitorous rebellion against the United States by those who wanted to maintain and extend slavery. The young flag bearer atop the monument holds a Confederate battle flag and the monument is dedicated “To the Talbot Boys C.S.A.,” the Confederate States of America.

The monument is a reminder of a time when people were enslaved, mistreated, raped, and murdered simply because of the color of their skin, move supporters say. That message of racism and white supremacy should not sit outside the Talbot County Circuit Court, where justice without prejudice is expected.

For those who want to Preserve Talbot History, the monument honors Talbot men who joined the Confederacy to fight against unconstitutional injustices in the county and Maryland at the hands of federal troops that occupied the state during the Civil War.

The monument should remain on the courthouse lawn, where it has stood for more than 100 years, envisioned during the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg, remain supporters say.

A third group, the Union Talbot Boys, is raising funds for a monument honoring Talbot’s Union veterans, who vastly outnumbered those who joined the Confederacy. A Union monument had been proposed in 1913, but the effort lost impetus as a result of World War I.

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

After Rejection, Advocates Continue Push to Remove Confederate Monument in Talbot

November 20, 2020 by Maryland Matters

For Ryan Ewing, the debate over removing a Confederate statue from the Talbot County courthouse lawn is personal: One of his family members is among those memorialized on the monument.

Ewing, a public defender who grew up in Talbot County, spoke to dozens of residents at a rally to bring down the statue last week. He told protesters at the Nov. 10 rally that the monument’s continued presence at the courthouse flies in the face of the United States justice system’s promise of fair trials.

“We ensure the appearance of fairness in every way that we can,” Ewing said. “It’s what we do in our justice system. And my question to everyone is: Does the presence of this statue give any of my clients the appearance that they will get a fair trial?”

The monument includes a statue of a soldier holding a Confederate battle flag. That flag has long been used to represent southern heritage, according to the Anti-Defamation League, but is sometimes also used as a symbol of racism and white supremacy.

It stands adjacent to a statue of Frederick Douglass, the prominent abolitionist who was once jailed in Talbot County while attempting to escape slavery.

Ewing said he won’t miss his family’s name on the monument if it’s moved from where it stands outside of the county courthouse. He prefers to memorialize his family members who fought in other wars, like his great uncle who was shot down over occupied France during World War II.

Talbot County Council members voted to keep the Confederate statue on the county courthouse’s grounds earlier this year — but for local advocates and residents, the fight to bring down the monument is far from over.

As county council members were meeting last Tuesday, dozens of residents crowded the lawn of the courthouse to demand the removal of the century-old monument that memorializes county residents who fought for the Confederacy during the American Civil War.

The Confederate monument has been a flash point in the county for years, with residents clashing over the memorial’s meaning and message. Those who want the statue to stay say the memorial isn’t meant to perpetuate a racist message, but opponents argue the statue’s presence is an ugly reminder of the county’s history of slavery and segregation.

According to data from the U.S. Census, roughly 12.8% of the county’s population is Black. The county’s population has been steadily increasing over the past decade, and it’s electoral makeup is changing as well: former vice president Joe Biden narrowly won Talbot County, becoming the first Democratic presidential nominee to win the county in more than 50 years.

At the protest, county residents homed in on the Confederacy’s connection to slavery in demanding the monument’s removal, arguing that the statue’s presence at the courthouse is inappropriate.

Keith Watts, a retired labor attorney, told protesters that the monument stands on the grounds of a former slave market, and said the Confederate symbol shouldn’t be allowed on grounds where families were split up forever.

He also addressed criticism of the movement to remove the statue, wherein advocates are accused of attempting to erase or censor history.

“I’m not advocating erasing history,” Watts said. “I’m advocating relocation.”

JoAnn Asparagus, a longtime magistrate for the Caroline County Circuit Court, noted that some who oppose the statue’s removal charge that slavery wasn’t the main reason for the Confederacy’s split from the Union.

“I don’t care whether it was the main reason, second or third,” Asparagus said. “It was a reason.”

Others pointed to Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens’ “Cornerstone Speech” as evidence linking the Confederacy to systemic racism and slavery. In that speech, Stephens said the “cornerstone” and foundation of the Confederacy was slavery and racial inequality.

“There are those who claim that removing that monument changes history,” Michael Pullen, the longtime Talbot County attorney, said after reading a portion of Stephens’ speech to the protesters. “I wish we could erase the 400 years of slavery, and the kidnapping, rape, torture, death, murder, the horror and terrorism that followed. I wish we could erase all of that by taking that statue down.”

Continued controversy

As Confederate monuments were toppled across the country amid a wave of protests against systemic racism and police brutality earlier this year, Talbot County Council members narrowly decided to keep the monument on the courthouse lawn.

Council members rejected a proposal to remove the monument in a 3-2 vote at an August meeting. In voting to keep the monument up, Republican council members said the Confederate monument’s fate should ultimately rest in the hands of community members.

“This should be in the hands of the community, and not our hands,” Council Vice President Charles F. Callahan III (R) said in rejecting the resolution.

The contested vote came amid pressure from state and federal officials to remove the monument. U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D) and Maryland Comptroller Peter V.R. Franchot (D) had both publicly called on county council members to remove the monument.

Republican Council President Corey W. Pack, who led the charge in attempting to remove the monument, was disappointed in the resolution’s failure. At the time, he warned that having a confederate monument outside of the county courthouse sends the wrong message to community members.

“I do not support the Talbot Boys statue remaining on the courthouse lawn,” Pack said in August. “It is not appropriate to keep that symbol on the courthouse lawn.”

Pack and Peter Lesher (D) voted to remove the monument, but the other Republicans on the council, Laura E. Price, Frank Divilio and Callahan, voted to keep the statue up.

The debate over the memorial isn’t a new one for county residents: In 2015, the county council voted to keep the statue after the local NAACP campaigned to remove it. At the time, Pack said the Confederate monument should stay on the courthouse grounds, arguing that removing it would be “disrespectful to the family members” of the soldiers memorialized.

Pack’s reversal and recent drive to remove the monument came after the killing of George Floyd by police in Minneapolis earlier this year. Floyd’s death sparked nationwide protests over police brutality and led to a renewed conversation about whether Confederate monuments should stand on public property.

In one of his final acts as Wicomico County Executive before his death, Bob Culver (R) removed a Confederate marker in Salisbury in June. The movement among local governments to remove Confederate monuments has continued in recent months: Just two weeks ago, officials in Fairfax County, Va., ordered the removal of several Confederate markers and memorials from their county courthouse.

Asparagus, the magistrate, told the crowd outside of the Talbot County Courthouse that Mississippians had voted to remove a Confederate symbol from their state flag during the Nov. 3 election. She encouraged county residents to continue to push council members for the statue’s removal.

“They don’t go down easy,” Asparagus said.

Continued conversations

Richard Potter, the president of the Talbot County NAACP, said he tried to convene a meeting between advocates and county council members in late October. County council members rejected his request, Potter said, because they didn’t want to discuss the monument publicly.

Pack said at an Oct. 27 meeting that the Talbot County Council hadn’t met with the NAACP in roughly five years. While Lesher and Pack weren’t opposed to meeting with Potter’s group, Price, Divilio and Callahan said they weren’t ready to convene a workgroup.

“We know that this is not a finished, done deal,” Price said. “I don’t want anybody to think that we’re just digging in and we’re not continuing to talk with members of the community and leaders in the community.

Lesher told Maryland Matters that other council members thought the next step in dealing with the memorial was to encourage constituents to meet with them one-on-one instead of hosting public debates or workshops.

“I personally don’t see what’s wrong with convening a workshop,” Lesher said. “But I’m willing to work with whatever will give us a path forward. If that’s what will move us forward, I’ll work with that.”

Callahan said at the Oct. 27 meeting that he wants the next phase of debate over the monument to start with one-on-one conversation. He said he wants to “iron some things out” in private to have a more informed conversation during future public meetings.

Price said some county residents might not be comfortable sharing their views on the Confederate monument on public record, noting that a meeting with a majority of the county council must be public record under the Maryland Open Meetings Act.

“Speaking individually, one-on-one, I believe is going to be a lot more productive at this time,” she said.

Potter accused council members of stalling the conversation about the Confederate monument instead of addressing it head on, and vowed to continue pushing for the removal of the monument.

“Nothing has been done,” Potter said. “I think these are all stall tactics, to not … address the issue. And we’re going to keep pressing on.”

Potter said he thinks the monument will hamper Talbot County’s efforts to modernize and grow moving forward, and said he thinks the time has come for officials to take another look at removing the statue.

“I think it has its place in our history,” Potter said. “But the place of it being on the courthouse lawn is no longer. It was there to send the message of hate. It was there to scare Black people. And that’s not our community anymore.”

By Bennett Leckrone

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Douglass: On the Cause of the Civil War and Honoring Rebel Soldiers

June 15, 2020 by John Griep

As Talbot County again debates the propriety of maintaining a statue on the grounds of the county courthouse to soldiers who fought for the Confederate States of America, it may be illustrative to read the words of Frederick Douglass concerning the cause of the war and whether rebel soldiers deserved the same honors as Union veterans and war dead.

Douglass, arguably the greatest native of Talbot County, was born a slave and escaped north to became a world-renowned orator and statesman and a leading abolitionist.

In speeches during and after the Civil War, Douglass made it clear that slavery was the reason for the rebellion of southern states against the United States of America.

In a lecture delivered repeatedly in the winter of 1863-1864, Douglass said:

“We are now wading into the third year of conflict with a fierce and sanguinary rebellion, one which, at the beginning of it, we were hopefully assured by one of our most sagacious and trusted political prophets would be ended in less than ninety days; a rebellion which, in its worst features, stands alone among rebellions a solitary and ghastly horror, without a parallel in the history of any nation, ancient or modern; a rebellion inspired by no love of liberty and by no hatred of oppression, as most other rebellions have been, and therefore utterly indefensible upon any moral or social grounds; a rebellion which openly and shamelessly sets at defiance the world’s judgment of right and wrong, appeals from light to darkness, from intelligence to ignorance, from the ever-increasing prospects and blessings of a high and glorious civilization to the cold and withering blasts of a naked barbarism; a rebellion which even at this unfinished stage of it counts the number of its slain not by thousands nor by tens of thousands, but by hundreds of thousands; a rebellion which in the destruction of human life and property has rivaled the earthquake, the whirlwind and the pestilence that waketh in darkness and wasteth at noonday.

It has planted agony at a million hearthstones, thronged our streets with the weeds of mourning, filled our land with mere stumps of men, ridged our soil with two hundred thousand rudely formed graves and mantled it all over with the shadow of death. A rebellion which, while it has arrested the wheels of peaceful industry and checked the flow of commerce, has piled up a debt heavier than a mountain of gold to weigh down the necks of our children’s children. There is no end to the mischief wrought. It has brought ruin at home, contempt abroad, has cooled our friends, heated our enemies and endangered our existence as nation.

Frederick Douglass

“Now, for what is all this desolation, ruin, shame suffering and sorrow? Can anybody want the answer? Can anybody be ignorant of the answer? It has been given a thousand times from this and other platforms. We all know it is slavery. Less than a half a million of Southern slaveholders — holding in bondage four million slaves — finding themselves outvoted in the effort to get possession of the United States government, in order to serve the interests of slavery, have madly resorted to the sword — have undertaken to accomplish by bullets what they failed to accomplish by ballots. That is the answer.”

— From www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/1864-frederick-douglass-mission-war

During the Decoration Day ceremony on May 30, 1871, at Arlington National Cemetery, Douglass continued to remind the nation that the war had been fought over slavery. He also made clear his thoughts that rebel soldiers — who had fought for slavery — should not receive the same honors as Union soldiers — who had fought for their nation and for liberty and justice.

Honoring the “Unknown Loyal Dead” buried at the cemetery, Douglass said:

Those unknown heroes whose whitened bones have been piously gathered here, and whose green graves we now strew with sweet and beautiful flowers, choice emblems alike of pure hearts and brave spirits, reached, in their glorious career that last highest point of nobleness beyond which human power cannot go. They died for their country.

No loftier tribute can be paid to the most illustrious of all the benefactors of mankind than we pay to these unrecognized soldiers when we write above their graves this shining epitaph.

When the dark and vengeful spirit of slavery, always ambitious, preferring to rule in hell than to serve in heaven, fired the Southern heart and stirred all the malign elements of discord, when our great Republic, the hope of freedom and self-government throughout the world, had reached the point of supreme peril, when the Union of these states was torn and rent asunder at the center, and the armies of a gigantic rebellion came forth with broad blades and bloody hands to destroy the very foundations of American society, the unknown braves who flung themselves into the yawning chasm, where cannon roared and bullets whistled, fought and fell. They died for their country.

We are sometimes asked, in the name of patriotism, to forget the merits of this fearful struggle, and to remember with equal admiration those who struck at the nation’s life and those who struck to save it, those who fought for slavery and those who fought for liberty and justice.

I am no minister of malice. I would not strike the fallen. I would not repel the repentant; but may my “right hand forget her cunning and my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth,” if I forget the difference between the parties to that terrible, protracted, and bloody conflict.

If we ought to forget a war which has filled our land with widows and orphans; which has made stumps of men of the very flower of our youth; which has sent them on the journey of life armless, legless, maimed and mutilated; which has piled up a debt heavier than a mountain of gold, swept uncounted thousands of men into bloody graves and planted agony at a million hearthstones — I say, if this war is to be forgotten, I ask, in the name of all things sacred, what shall men remember?

The essence and significance of our devotions here to-day are not to be found in the fact that the men whose remains fill these graves were brave in battle. If we met simply to show our sense of bravery, we should find enough on both sides to kindle admiration. In the raging storm of fire and blood, in the fierce torrent of shot and shell, of sword and bayonet, whether on foot or on horse, unflinching courage marked the rebel not less than the loyal soldier.

But we are not here to applaud manly courage, save as it has been displayed in a noble cause. We must never forget that victory to the rebellion meant death to the republic. We must never forget that the loyal soldiers who rest beneath this sod flung themselves between the nation and the nation’s destroyers. If today we have a country not boiling in an agony of blood, like France, if now we have a united country, no longer cursed by the hell-black system of human bondage, if the American name is no longer a by-word and a hissing to a mocking earth, if the star-spangled banner floats only over free American citizens in every quarter of the land, and our country has before it a long and glorious career of justice, liberty, and civilization, we are indebted to the unselfish devotion of the noble army who rest in these honored graves all around us.

— Text of Douglass speech from Philip S. Foner and Yuval Taylor, “Frederick Douglass: Selected Speeches and Writings.”

Douglass also warned of the “Lost Cause” mythology developed after the war that the rebels had been fighting for states’ rights, not to preserve slavery. And he challenged the laudatory obituaries about General Robert E. Lee in 1870 and opposed any monuments honoring Lee or supporting the Lost Cause interpretation.

In 1989, historian David Blight wrote this about Douglass:

In the midst of Reconstruction, Douglass began to realize the potential power of the Lost Cause sentiment. Indignant at the universal amnesty afforded ex-Confederates, and appalled by the national veneration of Robert E. Lee, Douglass attacked the emerging Lost Cause.

“The spirit of secession is stronger today than ever …,” Douglass warned in 1871. “It is now a deeply rooted, devoutly cherished sentiment, inseparably identified with the ‘lost cause,’ which the half measures of the Government towards the traitors have helped to cultivate and strengthen.”

He was disgusted by the outpouring of admiration for Lee in the wake of the general’s death in 1870.

“Is it not about time that this bombastic laudation of the rebel chief should cease?” Douglass wrote. “We can scarcely take up a newspaper . . . that is not filled with nauseating flatteries of the late Robert E. Lee.”

At this early stage in the debate over the memory of the war, Douglass had no interest in honoring the former enemy.

“It would seem from this,” he asserted, “that the soldier who kills the most men in battle, even in a bad cause, is the greatest Christian, and entitled to the highest place in heaven.” …

As for proposed monuments to Lee, Douglass considered them an insult to his people and to the Union. He feared that such monument building would only “reawaken the confederacy.”

Moreover, in a remark that would prove more ironic with time, Douglass declared in 1870 that “monuments to the Lost Cause will prove monuments of folly.”

As the Lost Cause myth sank deeper into southern and national consciousness, Douglass would find that he was losing ground in the battle for the memory of the Civil War.

— Taken from https://blogs.dickinson.edu/hist-288pinsker/files/2012/01/Blight-article.pdf

In 1894, in one of his last public speeches, Douglass continued to make the case that the American public should not forget that the rebels fought to preserve slavery and waged war against the nation.

“Fellow citizens: I am not indifferent to the claims of a generous forgetfulness, but whatever else I may forget, I shall never forget the difference between those who fought for liberty and those who fought for slavery; between those who fought to save the Republic and those who fought to destroy it.”

Among those debating the issue today, some still continue to believe that a major cause of the war was states’ rights, and not slavery. This view was expounded by Southerners after their decisive loss as part of the “Lost Cause” mythology of the war that included a romanticized view of the Old South and slavery itself. (For a synopsis of the Lost Cause ideology, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cause_of_the_Confederacy#:~:text=The%20Lost%20Cause%20narratives%20typically,superior%20military%20skill%20and%20courage)

Among those spreading the revised narrative after the war was Alexander Stephens, the vice president of the Confederate States of America.

Yet Stephens — just a few weeks before rebel troops started the war by firing on American soldiers at Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor, S.C. — made it absolutely clear that he agreed with Douglass: The cause of the war was slavery and the Confederate states were founded on the idea of white supremacy.

In what became known as the Cornerstone Speech, Stephens — after highlighting what he cited as several improvements in the Confederate constitution over the U.S. Constitution — said:

The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution — African slavery as it exists amongst us — the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the “rock upon which the old Union would split.” He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the “storm came and the wind blew.”

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and normal condition. [Applause.] This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

— Excerpt from https://www.owleyes.org/text/the-cornerstone-speech/read/text-of-stephenss-speech#root-38

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Talbot Council Talks Floyd, ‘Talbot Boys;’ Lesher Calls for Removal of Confederate Monument

June 13, 2020 by John Griep

The “Talbot Boys” monument should be removed from the county courthouse grounds, Talbot County Councilman Pete Lesher said Tuesday night.

Lesher is the first county councilman to call for the removal of the monument to the county’s Confederate soldiers (including some who moved to Talbot after the war) since a renewed effort began after the death of George Floyd.

Council President Corey Pack later asked council members to adopt a resolution to prohibit all statues depicting persons, signs of symbols of military actions on the courthouse grounds. He said the resolution would not prohibit monuments listing the names of Talbot County veterans of war.

The Talbot Boys monument has a statue of a young color bearer holding the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia atop a base listing the names of the Confederate soldiers. If Pack’s resolution was approved and applied to existing monuments, the statue would be removed but the base would remain.

The council discussion comes as the nation grapples with police brutality against people of color and amid demonstrations calling for racial justice and equality after the death of George Floyd while pinned down by Minneapolis police officers.

A peaceful protest last Saturday in downtown Easton attended by hundreds included calls for the monument’s removal.

During a public call-in comment period at its Tuesday night meeting, the Talbot County Council heard from several county residents urging them to remove the statue.

During the public comment period, Emily Thompson said she had emailed the council members about the statue’s removal.

“There will be a future Talbot County Council that will take this down,” she said Tuesday night. “You have an opportunity now to take action and listen to black voices. Are you going to wait and let your successors do the work you should have done years ago?

“All across the state and across the United States, we have seen true leaders,” Thompson said. “Show you don’t sympathize with rebels against the United States and white supremacists.”

“This isn’t history,” Benjamin Rubenstein of Trappe said in a call. “This is an opportunity for the county to act and take a stand. This is an opportunity for Talbot County to be a part of the solution.”

“I’m extremely outraged and disappointed” that a “symbol of slavery, white supremacy and racism” remains standing in Easton and Talbot County, Ari Rubenstein said.

“What side of history are you going to be on?” he asked. “We’re going to eradicate symbols of oppression. You need to be on the right side of history.”

Pack, who voted against a request to remove the monument in 2015 and 2016, said he had shared a written statement with his fellow council members before the meeting. Each council member spoke about the issue — some more directly than others — during council comments.

Pack, in his statement, said he was going to ask the county council to put a question on the November ballot asking Talbot voters whether the statue should be removed.

But to do so would have required action by the Maryland General Assembly, which completed its 2020 legislative session in a shortened session in March.

Pack, instead, offered his proposed resolution and also called for:

• a report outlining the county’s diversity training over the past two years and additional steps the county could take in the future;

• the drafting of a diversity statement to be included in the county employee handbook;

• putting a question on the ballot to amend the county’s charter to limit council members to two consecutive terms (a member could run for election again after sitting out a term);

• the council to send a letter to federal lawmakers supporting the Justice in Policing Act of 2020.

Current council members Laura Price and Chuck Callahan had voted with Pack against the monument’s removal in 2015 and 2016, after the NAACP officially requested the monument be removed following the murder of nine black parishioners at a Charlotte, N.C., church by a white supremacist.

The issue arose again in 2017 after a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., during which a counter-protester was killed and numerous others injured by a white supremacist who drove into a crowd.

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Sections

More