County Commissioners Table MOU for Further Discussion at March 3 Meeting
BY MILES LAYTON
On Monday, Chowan County Commissioners and Edenton Town Council held a special joint meeting and public hearing to hear public comments and discuss and consider the County and Town entering into a new Memorandum of Understanding and Agreement regarding the relocation of the Confederate Memorial. The meeting was held in culinary arts building at the College of the Albemarle-Edenton campus.
Town Council unanimously voted to accept the MOU, while the County Commission opted to table the matter for more study and revisit the issue during open session at its March 3 meeting. Commissioners will inform Town Council of their decision, and Town Council will address that during its March 11 meeting. There may be plans to host another joint session between the Town Council and the Commission in the near future.
More than 50 people representing both sides of the debate filled the large room. Everyone was civil and respectful as they presented their points of view regarding the relocation of the Confederate statue from its present location on South Broad Street to property owned by Chowan County and located behind the Chowan County Courthouse in the open space between the Chowan County Detention Center and the Veterans Memorial.
Many people made VERY good persuasive arguments during their speeches — points that will be revisited in another story.
“I think both sides made good arguments — I mean, that’s a real conundrum so I just want to say this was a good exercise and I hope everybody got a lot out of it,” said Larry McLaughlin, vice chairman of the Chowan County Commission.
Both sides cited history as being on their side, while others talked about the cancel culture, communists, racism and slavery.
A lifelong resident whose family goes back many generations in Chowan County, Joe Hollowell is a former county commissioner and former head of the Albemarle Commission. He spoke about supporting the compromise to move the statue to Veteran’s Park and the importance of preserving history.
“I’m a supporter of saving our history and accepting the compromise that we tried to put together to move it to the Memorial Park where all veterans have been memorialized,” he said. “And we are just saying rather than to lose it and destroy it, let’s move it to the park that’s controlled by the county, which is 14,000 people and not controlled by the town, although the citizens of the town are part of the county, it will be under the management and the control of the 14,000 people at Chowan County and the local Choan County commissioner. And it will be saved. And that’s the whole idea is just to save the monument, but not tear it down so it can remind us of our history.”
Hollowell continued, “When people walk by, they can recognize what these young men did, they gave their lives, but they gave their lives for a cause that we recognize, tried to perpetuate slavery and other things.
“We want to be reminded of never letting this country and this county get in that kind of situation again. And that’s why we need to save that monument. And the commissioners need to have the courage to join with the Town Council to sign this memorandum of understanding.”
An outspoken critic of the monument, Rod Phillips spoke to the need to pass on history that’s not worth saving, applying an analogy about outhouses and white hoods.
“My point is not everything that’s old is worth saving and not all history should be worth it. … You know, white hoods are part of the history here, but we don’t have a white hood in a glass case at a public library. Burned crosses are a part of our history, but we don’t have a burned cross standing out in front of our town hall. Sometimes, it’s best to just leave some things behind.”
Phillips said placing the statue by the courthouse will cause further litigation, meaning the status quo will remain in place as lawsuits percolate up through the justice system.
“Now, Chowan County has gone along very well so far without owning a Confederate monument. Why do we need one now? There’s a group in North Carolina that’s dedicated to the removal of Confederate monuments at the county courthouses,” said Phillips, a plaintiff in a lawsuit about removing the statue that was filed in early January. “The guys (SCV) at the front of the room here know this. They know that an attempt to install a Confederate monument at our courthouse is going to be challenged in court. They know this and their attitude seems to bring it on.”
Phillips continued, “The town might pay for moving this monument, but it will not be paying for the county’s legal bills in this fight to hang on to it. What some of the people holding this hearing are trying to do is score a personal victory in the ongoing culture wars, not solve a problem. They want to score one for their side, and they want us taxpayers to pay for it, and we need better than that.”
Michael Dean, Commander of the Edenton Bell Battery chapter of the Sons of the Confederate Veterans, was the first to speak.
“Nobody in the Edenton Bell Battery has expressed a desire to see the memorial moved as the proposed location is not seen as of equal or greater importance due to visibility issues,” he said. “Some officials have stated that Veteran’s Park behind the courthouse is ‘arguably of equal importance.’ We appreciate the work the County Commissioners have done on this in good faith and with good intentions.”
Dean continued, “In recent letters from the Sons of Confederate Veterans NC Division Commander Kevin Stone and James Wilson, attorney for the NC Division of the SCV, to Commissioners and Town Council, the issue of standing has been omitted from the agreement. According to them, this standing is a simple matter made in good faith, but the Town has been unwilling to include it. So the question is this – Is Town Council willing to concede the minor point and move on or drag this out for years to come through the appeals process?”
Rev. John Shannon was a member of Edenton’s Human Relations Commission that recommended moving the statue. Like Phillips, Shannon is also one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed in January.
“As a former member of the Human Relations Commission, we did our due diligence, investigating and researching one of several issues that we took on to enhance the relationships of the people here in, in this town, right? We were looking to help eradicate racism and the vision that we see in the town. And we came up with a recommendation for the town’s council to, for their consideration, that we thought would help improve the relationships and help change the image that’s portrayed in this town.
“Right? We researched, inquired, and went over the history of the Confederate monuments and what they symbolized in the late 1800s and the early 1900s in this town and across this country. And we also looked at what they stand for or symbolize to so many different people today.”
Shannon continued, “After 14 months of reflection, We, the Human Relations Commission of this town, recommended by our majority vote to the town Council to relocate the monument from the foot of Broad Street to some other site. We didn’t recommend where, but we did suggest that it be relocated somewhere other than where it was sitting at. As of right now, every attempt to move the Monument Monument has been delayed, redirected, or ignored.”
Shannon called on local leaders to set an example so that Edenton can serve as a beacon of progress.
“As a former member of the Human Relations Commission, as a former Vietnam veteran and as a black citizen and religious leader in this community, I hope that one day, one day soon, that the recommendation from the Human Relations Commission will be considered as a move in the right direction to better the relationships of all the citizens in Edenton, and that it would be a shining example to the rest of the world and what progress looks like in the 21st century,” he said. “I think it’s past time for our elected leaders, clergy, educators, and our business leaders to come together so that we might bring this community together and be an example around the world.”
Wayne Caskey of North Oakum Street offered an observation that many folks in the community may have experienced.
“I made it a point to become friends with people on both sides of that issue because I have relatives on one side, and friends on the other side. And I wanted to find out what they were about. … I have to remain neutral on this fact, on the monument, because I have friends on both sides of this issue.
What surprised me was how each side perceived the other side, the one side that wanted to remove that monument looked at the other side as a bunch of racists. And I got to know those people. And as a group as a whole, they are not racists. Are there racists among them? Sure, there are. And then the ones that want to keep that statue look at the other side that wants to remove it as a bunch of ungodly heathens.
“And I said, wait a minute, I know those people. I’m part of the Racial Reconciliation committee here in town. I said, they’re not as a whole, as a group. They’re not a bunch of ungodly heathens. Are there ungodly heathens among them? Sure there are. You’re gonna church Sunday. You know that fact when the council commissioners came out with that memorandum.”
Caskey continued, “I read it and I went, ‘Wow, that looks like a pretty good compromise. I think this is kind of a good thing.’ Wrong — until I started talking to people on both sides. … I talked to one man. I said, ‘Hey, I’m confused. Can you explain something to me? You want that statute removed, yet you filed a lawsuit not to have it removed. What’s going on with that?’ And so after we talked and he explained it to me, I understood where he was coming from on that issue. … All I can do is pray for this council, pray for the commissioner’s office because no matter what you do, there’s people going both sides that are not gonna be satisfied whatsoever.”
For those who read way too much into things — two pro-statue people were quoted, two move-the-statue people were quoted, and one neutral guy who understands the issue from both sides.
More people made good points, too, which will be included in a future article.
4 responses to “Community Debates Relocation of Confederate Statue in Edenton”
Much of the “history” recited by the anti-monument activists was bogus. As George Orwell wrote “from the totalitarian viewpoint, history is something to be created, not learned”.
Lets start with their trying to tie NC’s secession to slavery. If one reads NC’s secession documents, they will see that there is no mention at all of slavery in them. The path NC took to secession even more clearly dispels that notion.
North Carolina voted in February 1861 against secession, as the result of a successful anti-secession campaign of the Unionists led by former Whig leader Zeb Vance. What changed was Lincoln’s call for troops in April 1861. Governor Ellis responded “You will get no troops from North Carolina and initiated the process for a secession convention. Zeb Vance was actually in the middle of a speech at a Unionist rally when he was handed a note that Lincoln had called for troops and Vance immediately changed his position and called for secession. When the convention met, the vote for secession was unanimous, with a former Unionist leader making the motion to secede.
There is no serious question that the triggering event that caused NC’s secession was Lincoln’s call for troops to invade our fellow southern states, NOT slavery, That was generally also the case throughout the upper south.
Another bogus argument is the claim by the anti-monument activists that Confederate monuments were part of white supremacy and Jim Crow. Confederate monuments were erected in the same general time period prior to World War I when monuments to Union soldiers were erected. It is ludicrous to contend that either had a darn thing to do with white supremacy. All states involved in the war honored their fallen soldiers.
One also has to consider where white supremacy came from when it became a sickening public policy throughout the south. It had nothing to do with Confederate veterans but everything to do with partisan politics.
In the 1890s, white small farmers abandoned the Democrat Party which they regarded as in the hip pocket of the special interests of the day, and formed their own party, the Populist Party. The Populist then allied with the Republicans, then the party of black voters and Union sympathizers from the war, to challenge Democrat control across the south in what was known as the Fusion movement. This alliance was a formidable challenge to Democrat control, and in some states, including North Carolina, they were able to oust the Democrats and elect a Fusion governor and legislative majority.
In response to this political challenge, the Democrats responded across the South with a vicious white supremacy campaign designed to split the Fusion coalition. It worked, and when the Democrats regained political control, they doubled down against any prospect of that coalition returning by passing Jim Crow laws.
I suspect that many of those who falsely connect Confederate monuments with white supremacy are probably registered to vote in the political party that actually was the group that brought in white supremacy as a cynical partisan political power play. If they want to reject white supremacy, changing their voter registration would make more sense than attacking monuments that had nothing to do with the problem.
One of the speakers mentioned a campaign against historic monuments by the extreme left “Southern Coalition for Social Justice” out of Durham. We should not let the far left blackmail us into giving up our history. As George Orwell wrote “the most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.” We should also understand that “social justice” is the far left’s euphemism for “socialism”.
[…] Our last story featured many speakers, while this story includes several folks who also made good points from the more than 20 people who spoke at the meeting. The speakers and the points they made are in no particular order. […]
[…] joint meeting last week, advocates on both sides of the issue made their case — see our stories, here and here. […]
[…] Paul about those folks dehumanizing others who they disagree with. Referring to last week’s joint Town and County meeting, Paul said, “I’ve never been so offended in my life. I’ve never been called a white […]