Restricted Richmond weighs over 20 offers for statues

jcaesar

Private
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
With this being an election year for many offices local, state and federal there is/will be much political posturing in the course of decisions being made and right vs wrong will not be given as much consideration as current vocal popular opinion.
of course this is my own opinion, as always, others mileage may vary.

Its not so much public opinion as it is elite media opinion. As long as they make 20 second heroes out of every official who jumps aboard the train of politicizing historical monuments there will be a huge incentive for officials to continue fighting modern battles using history. The less press oxygen the whole thing gets the more what happens to these monuments or any monuments will be decided by actually thinking about the best opinions.
 
Last edited:

Quaama

Sergeant
Joined
Sep 13, 2020
Location
Port Macquarie, Australia
Does the city have legal ownership of the statues to the point where they may sell them and profit from them?

It would seem doubtful.

In the case of the A P Monument the statue and pedestal are part of a gravesite and presumably should go wherever A P Hill goes.

In the case of the R E Lee statue this [news link] says:
"Real estate investor Otway S. Allen and his sisters, Bettie F. Allen Gregory and Martha Allen Wilson, donated the circle of land with a radius of 100 feet to the state for the statue"; and
"The document, found on pages 367-370 in Deed Book 129B, transcribed on the Virginia Memory website, includes the language that the state, referred to by the female pronoun: “executes this instrument in token of her acceptance of the gift and her guarantee that she will hold said Statue and pedestal and Circle of ground perpetually sacred to the Monumental purpose to which they have been devoted and that she will faithfully guard it and affectionately protect it.”
Therefore the gift of the land (to the State of Virginia not the City of Richmond) is subject to certain conditions so it would seem unlikely that they have any claim to ownership of anything on it. They do have a perpetual duty to guard and affectionately protect it.
 

Viper21

Brigadier General
Moderator
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
In the case of the R E Lee statue this [news link] says:
"Real estate investor Otway S. Allen and his sisters, Bettie F. Allen Gregory and Martha Allen Wilson, donated the circle of land with a radius of 100 feet to the state for the statue"; and
"The document, found on pages 367-370 in Deed Book 129B, transcribed on the Virginia Memory website, includes the language that the state, referred to by the female pronoun: “executes this instrument in token of her acceptance of the gift and her guarantee that she will hold said Statue and pedestal and Circle of ground perpetually sacred to the Monumental purpose to which they have been devoted and that she will faithfully guard it and affectionately protect it.”
Therefore the gift of the land (to the State of Virginia not the City of Richmond) is subject to certain conditions so it would seem unlikely that they have any claim to ownership of anything on it. They do have a perpetual duty to guard and affectionately protect it.
Which is one of the reasons why it's still standing. Make no mistake, this particular monument IS a big deal. Can a state make a deal, & then disregard it..? There are tremendous legal issues at stake in this instance.
 

PapaReb

First Sergeant
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Location
Arkansas CSA occupied
Which is one of the reasons why it's still standing. Make no mistake, this particular monument IS a big deal. Can a state make a deal, & then disregard it..? There are tremendous legal issues at stake in this instance.
Unfortunately, making deals and then changing or backing out of them has been par for the course for our states and country. Just ask virtually any Native American tribe.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
I was reading about this today, and here is something that struck me a bit odd....

The Navy League of the United States wants the Maury statue as remembers his scientific contributions to the US......

So can't but help wonder if a US veterans group wants a statue because it orginally and still commemorates someone's contribution to the United States......why was it even removed in the first place.....
 
Last edited:

PapaReb

First Sergeant
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Location
Arkansas CSA occupied
I was reading about this today, and here is something that struck me a bit odd....

The Navy League of the of United States wants the Maury statue as remembers his scientific contributions to the US......

So can't but help wonder if a US veterans group wants a statue because it orginally and still commemorates someone's contribution to the United States......why was it even removed in the first place.....
I believe that after all of the dust settles there are going to be many questions about many of the things that are/have happening(ed).
If not by us then by future generations that will recognize this for what it is....madness.
 

jcaesar

Private
Joined
Aug 28, 2020
There are those who want to protest the issues they have such as the Nigeria protests today


But, I am going to be frank none of the issues protested in front of the statue this year have anything to do with the statue or the man in question and how many are willing to say that?

This is also being used by culture elites who think that by de-platforming history and re-educating the next generation they will think the ‘right’ way.
 

Quaama

Sergeant
Joined
Sep 13, 2020
Location
Port Macquarie, Australia
There are those who want to protest the issues they have such as the Nigeria protests today


But, I am going to be frank none of the issues protested in front of the statue this year have anything to do with the statue or the man in question and how many are willing to say that?

This is also being used by culture elites who think that by de-platforming history and re-educating the next generation they will think the ‘right’ way.

That doesn't look like the "Statue and pedestal and Circle of ground [are being held] perpetually sacred to the Monumental purpose to which they have been devoted" nor that anyone is faithfully guarding and affectionately protecting it. [And neither did many earlier instances, as evidenced by the sate the pedestal is in.]
 

Jamieva

Captain
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Location
Midlothian, VA
I was reading about this today, and here is something that struck me a bit odd....

The Navy League of the United States wants the Maury statue as remembers his scientific contributions to the US......

So can't but help wonder if a US veterans group wants a statue because it orginally and still commemorates someone's contribution to the United States......why was it even removed in the first place.....

The pedestal the Maury statue sat on had verbiage that spoke to his contributions to the Confederacy. They are most likely just wanting the part of the statue that represented Maury himself that sat on the pedestal.
 

Jamieva

Captain
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Location
Midlothian, VA
If they are going to exercise their right of protest in the United States at a historical monument it should at least have something to do within the context of who/what/when the monument/statue represents. The lunatics are now running the asylum.

Groups have taken over the greenspace around Lee for whatever cause du jour they want at this point. The RPD has gone in a couple of times in the last month or two. People were taking power off the grid illegally to live there, cooking food illegally and people are just using the bathroom wherever they please in the neighborhood. The local news in Richmond at least has given up on the daily coverage of it so groups down there now have a really hard time getting media attention. The local media has moved on and doesn't care. The next big move will be whenever this judge decides on the lawsuits regarding the monument which should be this week.
 

Viper21

Brigadier General
Moderator
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
Groups have taken over the greenspace around Lee for whatever cause du jour they want at this point. The RPD has gone in a couple of times in the last month or two. People were taking power off the grid illegally to live there, cooking food illegally and people are just using the bathroom wherever they please in the neighborhood. The local news in Richmond at least has given up on the daily coverage of it so groups down there now have a really hard time getting media attention. The local media has moved on and doesn't care. The next big move will be whenever this judge decides on the lawsuits regarding the monument which should be this week.
Not really. Their lack of reporting on it, is giving it cover. Most people (outside of Richmond), are under the impression the nonsense has stopped. Most have no idea it is looking more & more like downtown San Francisco :O o:

There are political components as to why the local media is ignoring it lately.
 

PapaReb

First Sergeant
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Location
Arkansas CSA occupied
Not really. Their lack of reporting on it, is giving it cover. Most people (outside of Richmond), are under the impression the nonsense has stopped. Most have no idea it is looking more & more like downtown San Francisco :O o:

There are political components as to why the local media is ignoring it lately.
Makes me wonder what’s happening that we’re not hearing about. At this point I have very little trust in ANY media of any format, televised, broadcast or print.
 

jcaesar

Private
Joined
Aug 28, 2020

I saw this coming based on the date the judge decided to have his ruling. He had already decided months ago. If he was going to vote against Northam he would have waited until after the first week of November.

It will go to the state Supreme Court. But, my gut tells me only the President using his federal monument powers could save it at this point. My gut also tells me Virginia history before the 20th century including the battlefields will be gone on the current course.
 
Last edited:

PapaReb

First Sergeant
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Location
Arkansas CSA occupied

I saw this coming based on the date the judge decided to have his ruling. He had already decided months ago. If he was going to vote against Northam he would have waited until after the first week of November.

It will go to the state Supreme Court. But, my gut tells me only the President using his federal monument powers could save it at this point. My gut also tells me Virginia history before the 20th century including the battlefields will be gone on the current course.
Not certain that the POTUS would have jurisdiction for a monument owned and erected on State owned property unless there would some means by which he could declare it a Federal Monument by some sort of Executive Action, but then I believe that would be declared unconstitutional and eventually be struck down by the Supreme Court.

I simply do not understand why the State of Virginia (and other States also) will not put the fate of the monuments and statues to a popular vote. Let the whole of the people speak, not just ones who scream and destroy at their own whim.
 

Quaama

Sergeant
Joined
Sep 13, 2020
Location
Port Macquarie, Australia

I saw this coming based on the date the judge decided to have his ruling. He had already decided months ago. If he was going to vote against Northam he would have waited until after the first week of November.

It will go to the state Supreme Court. But, my gut tells me only the President using his federal monument powers could save it at this point. My gut also tells me Virginia history before the 20th century including the battlefields will be gone on the current course.

I thought this likely too.

As I'm unfamiliar with your legal system, do Judges not give a reasoning for their decisions in such cases? I would have thought that in addition to the decision the Judge would have explained how he arrived at that decision with reference to laws and pertinent precedent.
I suspect a reasoning is contained within the "Letter Opinion of October 27, 2020" which is referred to in the decision. Is the "Letter Opinion of October 27, 2020" published anywhere so we can all see it?
 
Top