Statue debate: Tubman, Hanson backers make case
Sen. Catherine Pugh at a hearing today urged her fellow lawmakers to support a proposal to place a statue of Harriet Tubman in the U.S. Capitol's Statuary Hall Collection.
Each state can have only two representatives, and since 1903, Maryland's have been John Hanson, a president of the Continental Congress, and Charles Carroll, the only Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence.
Pugh's proposal, promoted by the NAACP and National Organization of Women, means that Hanson would have to go. Tubman, an Eastern Shore-born slave who led dozens to freedom on the Underground Railroad, would be the 10th woman and only African American in the collection.
"History changes. Time changes. Everything changes," said Pugh, a Baltimore Democrat. "This country has progressed."
Gov. Martin O'Malley supports the Tubman proposal. A House of Delegates committee also held a hearing today on the matter.
At the Senate hearing, Hanson descendant and scholar Peter Michael called Hanson "the only Marylander to serve in the nation's highest office."
Michael suggested that Maryland "take the lead" by asking Congress to expand the collection to allow more than two statues per state. Some lawmakers on the committee seemed supportive of that idea.
"I don't like the idea that we're going to take a Marylander like John Hanson out," said Roy Dyson, a St. Mary's County Democrat.
But many of the Tubman supporters said state lawmakers should focus on the parameters Congress has given them. The president of the Maryland NOW chapter said she was offended by Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller's suggestion that Congress make a separate collection for additional statues. (Miller, a Southern Maryland Democrat, is a Hanson supporter.)
Moonyene Jackson-Amis, an Easton resident, said the issue of whether to trade statues is simple in her mind: "I want to see somebody who looks like me."
(Photo by The Sun's Kim Hairston)
Comments
It does not matter whose image is placed on a statue, it is still nothing more than a place for pigeons to rest and poop. The only important thing is that any statue should be paid for with private donations, not public money.
Posted by: Inyerk Hunt | February 24, 2011 8:51 AM
History changes?? What a twit.
Posted by: chesepioc | February 24, 2011 9:06 AM
When do these clowns in Annapolis get to something important?
Who cares about statues when there is a 1.6 billion dollar MOM deficit to be plugged?
Posted by: john | February 24, 2011 9:58 AM
So, who determined that the Hanson statue should be replaced instead of Carroll, and where would the removed statue go? Who will sculpt the proposed Tubman statue, and who's going to pay for it? The NAACP? Why are our legislators fooling around with this, renaming mountains, and gay marriage instead of addressing our critical fiscal issues?
Posted by: bilrux | February 24, 2011 11:44 AM
chcesepic said it perfectly: Pugh is a twit. The sadder thing is that this is proof of Blacks trying to REwrite history to suit themselves - forget what REALLY happened.
Posted by: Michael Calo | February 25, 2011 9:33 PM
Actually this is a incidence of white people rewriting history. John Hanson is the 9th person to serve as President of Congress Assembled. Congress Assembled was more like the EU, with each state being more like a country than how we think of states today. There was no executive branch so the office of President had no power and only lead meetings of Congress Assembled. Hanson was the 3rd to serve under the Articles of Confederation. He was the first to serve under the RATIFIED Articles of Confederation and serve a twelve month term. He was also the first the President of Congress Assembled to present his resignation.
Not to say that John Hanson was not a patriot just that his role was not nearly as important as Carroll. John Hanson's career was puffed up by factions pushing to put that statue in Statuary Hall in the first place.
Carroll and Tubman tell a much better story. Carroll was one of the richest men an America at the time, but because he was a Roman Catholic he could not vote, practice law or hold public office. He risked everything he owned not just to free America but to restore rights to people who belonged to churches other than the Church of England. When the war was over Carroll (who was a large slave owner) introduced the first bill to call for a gradual end to slavery in Maryland, it had no support.
Harriet Tubman was denied the the most basic of freedoms and in her own way did exactly what the the American Colonists did, she took the matter of freedom into her own hands. She never forgot what it was like to be powerless and fought for the rights of others for the rest of her life.
The two together provide an example we should pay attention to. No matter how powerful or powerless you should fight for rights and in doing so you help others and change history.
None of this will erase John Hanson, it's just a better story of who we should be.
Posted by: Deborah Brower | March 1, 2011 8:57 AM