On Monday, protesters at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill toppled the statue of “Silent Sam,” a memorial to a Confederate soldier. Although students had called for the removal of the statue before, the university claimed that its hands were tied by state law. They were, and that state law needs to go.
In 2015, the North Carolina state legislator passed a law that prohibits the removal, relocation or alteration of any monument, memorial or work of art owned by the state without approval from the North Carolina Historical Commission. The conditions under which removal can be granted, however, are extremely narrow.
“Limitation on Removal. – An object of remembrance located on public property may not be permanently removed and may only be relocated, whether temporarily or permanently, under the circumstances listed in this subsection and subject to the limitation in this subsection.”
The law goes on to explain that anything that is removed must be returned to its location within 90 days and that any relocation that occurs must be to a site of “similar prominence, honor, visibility, availability, and access” and cannot be moved to a “museum, cemetery, or mausoleum unless it was originally placed at such a location.”
Even then, relocation may only occur for preservation as deemed appropriate by the state or when necessary from construction.
In short, the university is right. This state law has prevented localities from doing pretty much anything about confederate statues – even when there is popular support and demand for their removal. To take down a statue would require another state law.
Even more galling, however, are the circumstances under which North Carolina enacted this legislation.
That state law was passed in the immediate aftermath of the June 17, 2015 shooting during a prayer service at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church killing nine people, all African Americans, in Charleston South Carolina. Just over a month later, Governor Pat McCrory signed the bill into law on July 23, 2015.
So, what was this law protecting by preventing statues like “Silent Sam” from being removed? Here’s a look at how that statue came to be on campus.
It was first proposed by the United Daughters of the Confederacy in 1908 – more than 40 years after then end of the Civil War as part of a well-documented effort to rewrite the history of the Confederacy. In fact, around the same time that “Silent Sam” was dedicated, the UDC endorsed and promoted materials for use in schools that championed the Ku Klux Klan as heroic for their work preserving white supremacy.
The statue itself was erected in 1913 on commencement day and featured a speech by Confederate veteran and UNC trustee Julian Carr. Carr makes clear the intent of the statue telling the audience, “the present generation, I am persuaded, scarcely takes note of what the Confederate soldier meant to the welfare of the Anglo-Saxon race during the four years immediately succeeding the war, when the facts are, that their courage and steadfastness saved the very life of the Anglo-Saxon race.” While modern audiences might not recognize what Carr is referencing here, the “four years after the war” refers to the time during which the first iteration of the KKK terrorized and intimidated African Americans and made it their mission to restore white supremacy over all official reconstruction efforts. During that time, the KKK was led by many former Confederate generals, including Nathan Bedford Forrest who was the first Grand Wizard.
Carr then talks about a “rather personal” story in which he recounts how “One hundred yards from where we stand [on Franklin Street], less than ninety days perhaps after my return from Appomattox, I horse-whipped a negro wench until her skirts hung in shreds” referring to the act as a “pleasing duty.”
This is the legacy that a North Carolina state law, passed in the aftermath of a deadly shooting at a black church, protects.
That law and its defenders, such as the North Carolina Sons of Confederate Veterans who had demanded the return of “Silent Sam,” have prevented local communities from having control over the monuments that they live with. As it turns out, the activists who wanted the statue removed, had no legal means do to so short of a new state law. That is unacceptable.
