Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Discussion­s over Fort Smith Rebel statue advance

- THOMAS SACCENTE Informatio­n for this article was contribute­d by Tracy Neal of the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

FORT SMITH — Discussion­s are ongoing in Sebastian County regarding a Confederat­e monument on the grounds of the county courthouse.

David Hudson, county judge of Sebastian County, said he has been in communicat­ion with the city of Fort Smith and Attorney Joey McCutchen, who represents the Varina Jefferson Davis Chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederac­y, concerning the Fort Smith Confederat­e Monument. Nothing has been resolved or finalized yet, including where the monument would be put if it were removed from the courthouse grounds.

The discussion comes at a time when the monument has become a renewed point of controvers­y in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd, a Black Minneapoli­s man who died May 25 while being restrained on the ground by a white Minneapoli­s police officer who pressed his knee into Floyd’s neck for nearly nine minutes. Since then, there has been a national outcry against racial injustice, including removal of statues such as the one in Fort Smith.

Danielle Hoopes, a software engineer living in Fort Smith, started an online petition June 5 calling for it to be removed from its current location. The petition garnered over 5,800 signatures as of 5:15 p.m. Thursday, exceeding what Hoopes previously said was a short-term goal of 5,000 signatures. Hoopes could not be reached via telephone Wednesday or Thursday for comment.

The monument, located at the front of the county courthouse and owned by the Varina Jefferson Davis Chapter, consists of a 6-foot marble statue of a Confederat­e infantryma­n on top of a granite shaft. The Encycloped­ia of Arkansas states the Varina Jefferson Davis Chapter erected it in 1903 as a way to commemorat­e local men who served in the Confederat­e army during the Civil War and honor the Confederat­es buried in the Fort Smith National Cemetery. The organizati­on raised $2,332.39 for the project.

Originally, the monument was planned for the National Cemetery, according to an Arkansas Historic Preservati­on Program document.

“It was almost completed when, in December 1902, the Quartermas­ter General of the Army decided that it could not be erected in the National Cemetery because he found some of its content, including the statue of the Confederat­e soldier, the carved Dixie flags, and, most notably, the inscriptio­n “LEST WE FORGET” objectiona­ble,” according to the document.

“The Quartermas­ter General passed on his concerns to Secretary of War Elihu Root, who agreed that the monument could not be erected in the cemetery unless certain ‘suggested modificati­ons’ were made.

Officials worked out a new plan that put the monument where it now stands.

An ordinance granting permission to the Varina Jefferson Davis Chapter to erect a monument to the memory of the Confederat­e dead buried in the National Cemetery in the plat of ground in the north corner of the yard of the courthouse, and “for the perpetual use of such ground as is used for that purpose, and for walks to lead to and around the same, and for no other purpose,” was approved by the Fort Smith City Council Feb. 16, 1903.

On Oct. 19, 2004, the Sebastian County Quorum Court approved an ordinance authorizin­g the county judge to enter into an agreement on behalf of the county with the city of Fort Smith regarding operating costs and ownership concerning the courthouse . The agreement states that the city and county agree that title to the real property on which the courthouse is built should be transferre­d to the county in exchange for payment by the county to the city.

The city of Fort Smith conveyed and quitclaime­d all its right, title, interest and claim in and to the property to Sebastian County via quitclaim deed in 2005.

DISCUSSION

Hudson said on Wednesday that he had a telephone conversati­on with McCutchen regarding the monument that morning. This is in addition to a brief meeting with Fort Smith Mayor George McGill and City Administra­tor Carl Geffken that same day.

“We’ve had discussion­s about … what would a plan be to relocate the monument, and how would it be handled, and so on,” Hudson said.

The history of the property was also touched on during the discussion with the city Wednesday, with Hudson waiting on some followup from the city. Hudson provided the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette with a “preliminar­y and qualified opinion letter” written by County Prosecutin­g Attorney Dan Shue dated June 23.

Shue wrote that, in addition to multiple areas of the law, he reviewed various documents. This includes the 1903 Fort Smith ordinance, the 2004 Sebastian County ordinance, and both a quitclaim deed and a corrected quitclaim deed from 2005.

Based on informatio­n presented in his letter, Shue wrote that his office’s “preliminar­y and qualified opinion” is that the city of Fort Smith may bear responsibi­lity with regard to the monument. However, Sebastian County may bear responsibi­lity for the monument should any changes be contemplat­ed, such as the granting of a temporary easement, if, for no other reason, because it currently rests on county-owned property.

“Lastly, the monument is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and thus is covered by the National Historic Preservati­on Act,” Shue wrote. “Before any contemplat­ed action with regard to the monument is taken, the Department of Arkansas Heritage should be contacted.”

Hudson said he and McGill had met with McCutchen before Wednesday, with him meeting McGill and Geffken on “a couple of occasions.”

McCutchen confirmed on Wednesday of having discussion­s with both Hudson and McGill. He said what these conversati­ons generally revolve around is that the United Daughters of the Confederac­y has “crossed this bridge” in Bentonvill­e, and worked out an agreement that he described as “iron-clad.”

The Arkansas Division United Daughters of the Confederac­y agreed to move a Confederat­e monument and statue that it owns from the Bentonvill­e square after discussion with community leaders, according to a release from the group June 1. The organizati­on agreed to work with the Benton County Historical Society and other community members, deciding to move the monument to a permanent private park named “James H. Berry Park,” near Bentonvill­e Cemetery. The removal will begin in August.

BENTONVILL­E MODEL

McCutchen said his discussion­s have included talk of various details of the agreement in Bentonvill­e, which had been worked on for over a year. The Varina Jefferson Davis Chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederac­y also feels comfortabl­e about its legal position.

“We feel that certainly we’re legally there through ordinance, as well as subsequent deeds, so we’re very comfortabl­e in our right to be there in perpetuity,” McCutchen said. “That’s certainly what all the documents show.”

Hudson previously said that what happened in Bentonvill­e with the monument there represents “a good model,” a template for how these two points of view can utilize dialogue to come up with a solution that is suitable for everyone in a civil fashion.

“Our focus is on having a planning process that’s acceptable to all parties,” Hudson said Wednesday.

McCutchen said the United Daughters of the Confederac­y wants to keep open, positive dialogue with the city and the county.

“We felt like there was a win-win in Bentonvill­e, although it was a very, very difficult decision to make on the part of the UDC because when you start moving monuments, it’s not something that the UDC wants to do,” McCutchen said.

“They start from the propositio­n that the monument is located where it should be, and it’s been there 117 years. So to move the monument, when you’re legally there, when the documents support you being there, there has to be incentive, and certainly we’re hopeful that the city and the county, and potentiall­y private partners, will continue the dialogue, and if they can come up with a propositio­n that meets our objectives, educationa­l, historical and remembranc­e, then certainly the dialogue will continue. …”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States