UPDATE: Lawsuit Filed to Keep John C. Calhoun Statue in S.C.

The John C. Calhoun monument perched atop Marion Square in the City of Charleston prior to its removal in June 2020.

 

Attorneys have filed papers to keep the John C. Calhoun monument that was removed in Charleston from being shipped to a radical left group on the other side of America in Los Angeles. This promises to be a strong move in the continuing battle to defend regional history and prevent negative, anti-Southern forces from stripping the lower half of America of its character, pride and its personal dignity as planned by some organized groups in the country whose Marxist tenets are striving for a “critical race war.”

In mid-November, it was reported that a California museum had requested taking the John C. Calhoun statue to add to its collection of Confederate statues for an exhibit titled “Monuments.” (Danielle Seat, “California Museum Requests John C. Calhoun Statue,” www.live5news.com, Nov 17 2021.)

According to attorney Bill Connor of Orangeburg, groups and members of the community of Charleston became incensed with the thought of the statue leaving not just Charleston but the state of South Carolina and going to such a distant place. Some of those citizens approached him and a second attorney, Lauren Martel (Bluffton, SC) regarding steps they might take to try to keep the statue in its rightful place in South Carolina.

“Those citizens began to look to us for ways to stop what they thought was a complete and unwarranted action to denigrate John Calhoun and to destroy important South Carolina history,” Connor stated. “They were horrified with this idea of sending the monument away. I told them we would fight.”

 

WHAT’S THE TRUE INTENT?

In speaking with Connor, he explained that several descendants of John Calhoun and of the Ladies Calhoun Monument Association had expressed real concerns about the actual plans for the Calhoun statue if taken to the Los Angeles museum.

“It’s not like the statue is going to be placed in an honorable place of distinction there,” Connor stated.

 

“The plan is to place it there in a degrading and anti-Southern setting which goes totally contrary to its original intent in Charleston. This Marxist-inspired group has no good intent for it or several other statues they have or are trying to obtain. The most recent monument they are trying to acquire is the famous ‘Stonewall Jackson’ statue from Charlottesville, Virginia and one [that was removed] from New Orleans of Robert E. Lee. It’s an on-going scheme to degrade Southern history with a Socialist agenda,” Connor said.

LAXART Museum director Hamza Walker stated in a letter that the way the monument is exhibited will be to clearly point out the fallacy of the “Lost Cause Belief” of the South.

“The Lost Cause contends that the South’s secession… and the ensuing bloodshed was not about slavery but rather, was courageously fought to defend states’ rights from a tyrannical federal government in spite of overwhelming odds against them,” Walker said.

In fact, in its correspondence with Charleston officials, the LA museum has called its plan to place the monuments in degrading settings “contextualization,” a vague term that means creating a story or scene to reflect their group’s radical point of view on Southern history—and one not based upon facts.

In truth, the works of the LAXART Museum display definite anti-Americanism and the over turning of all United States history and traditions, not simply Southern. (See example exhibit photo from the LAXART website showing mockery of sacred U.S. mottos.)

 

In their own website descriptions, LAXART’s exhibits appear simply “lewd” art expressions by traditional standards. One exhibit features unprintable words and is entitled “Remote Castration.” The Los Angeles Times wrote that the exhibit is “a provocative show about female power and sexual violence“. One especially anti-American display called “Reconstitution” touts “Poverty and Sadness for Which it Stands,” “Red Skin Bounty Tis of Thee,” “Is Republic Fair, Bombs Bursting Air,” “500 Years Violence Purple Mountain Majesties,” and “Shed Grace on Thee American Brutality,” all placed on a background of Arabic words.

Attorney Connor stated that LAXART wishes to make its exhibit works available for schools and educational settings. “Do we really want our South Carolina monument to be part of an educational process for children that uses lewd, crude and even sexually offensive language—much less anti-Southern and anti-Americanism? I don’t think so.”

 

CITY ACTION AND BASIS FOR LAWSUIT

When the city was approached by LAXART to take the statue, it elected to have the Charleston Historical Commission hold discussions among its members regarding the statue’s disposition. In the meantime, Attorneys Connor and Martel prepared and entered a lawsuit to stop any decision to move the monument to Los Angeles.

Despite the suit, at a meeting in mid-December, the Historical Commission recommended that the monument be given to LAXART which stated that it would pay for all expenses of and arrange for transportation of the piece to California. That left the Charleston City Council to decide by vote on whether to go along with the gift and planned move.

That vote was to take place January 11 at the Charleston City Council meeting—before the lawsuit was served on the members of City Council, the Mayor of Charleston and the SC Attorney General. As a result of the suit, the Charleston City Council tabled the discussion and vote for that meeting to deal with the suit and its possible consequences. It is unknown at this time when the Council may place this issue on their agenda.

The lawsuit to save the monument was entered on behalf of plaintiffs Mark Calhoun and Francis Doty, III, descendants of John C. Calhoun, and F. Preston Wilson, descendant of a member of the Ladies Calhoun Monument Association which raised funds, commissioned the monument, and gave it over to the city in trust.

 

A major portion of the suit centers around the fact that the monument was given to the city of Charleston “in trust” by the Ladies Calhoun Monument Association and that the Charleston City Council passed a resolution to receive the monument and “… watch over and keep it as a priceless treasure and sacred trust” at that time. An exhibit with the suit is a letter from the monument association to the city which states that the city was agreeing to “take custody, control and care of the monument and spot upon which it stands” and to “preserve and guard it, and all that it represents.”

Attorneys state that this means the city cannot give the statue away; in addition, they state that to send it to Los Angeles where Calhoun will be denigrated and demeaned goes against their city’s agreement to guard and protect all that it represents.

The case also makes the larger point that according to the 2000 South Carolina Heritage Act, monuments at the time this one was taken down could not be removed except by a 2/3 majority vote by the South Carolina legislature—an action which never took place.

The association also objects to the fact that the base of the monument was demolished and turned into rubble by the city after the statue’s removal.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs are asking that the statue not be removed from its rightful place in South Carolina or sent out of state to the LAXART Museum. In addition, they are stating that it should rightfully be returned to its place of honor in Charleston.

 

SUPPORT FROM HERITAGE GROUP AND REPRESENTATIVE BENNETT

A group called the American Heritage Association (AHA) plans to assist with legal fees, according to the group’s president, Brett Barry. “This is a South Carolina monument, paid for by South Carolinians, and it needs to stay in South Carolina,” stated Barry.

“For those who would like to assist with our fight to keep the Calhoun monument here, we welcome any and all contributions which will go to assist with on-going legal expenses of this project,” Barry said. “Also, keep up with our fund-raising activities as we are continuing to seek financial assistance for this fight. Write to amheritageassoc@gmail.com or contact us on the website to participate.”

An additional part of the legal action involves suing South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson who plaintiffs state has not kept his duty to defend the statue under the SC Heritage Act—a duty that is not “optional.” State Representative Lin Bennett of Charleston (Republican) has publicly stated that she plans to introduce a bill on the first day of the new session to cut millions in state funding to the City of Charleston if they move the monument to the LAXART Museum.

 

WAS JOHN C. CALHOUN A “TERRIBLE GUY”?

Statesman John C. Calhoun was, like many leaders in America, a complex man. His major accomplishments included being a United States Representative to Congress for South Carolina, Secretary of War under James Monroe, Vice President under John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State and a United States Senator—highly impressive credentials for representing the state of South Carolina and a record hardly equaled anywhere in politics by one man. He initially ran for President before losing that nomination and then running for Vice President.

Calhoun was known for his strong push to fight the British in the “second war of independence” for young America—the War of 1812. Had America lost that war, it would have been many decades before it would have ever become an independent nation from Britain—if ever. He was, therefore, an exceptionally important character in the early development of this nation. In fact, slavery was primarily brought to America by Britain for financial gain, so without establishing our independence, it may have been a much longer road to become a nation where slavery did NOT exist.

Calhoun was also an instrumental player in the Mexican American War to establish essential boundaries on the southern border of our new nation. For this reason, also, in California where the demography has changed in recent years to a majority population originating from south of the current US border, a negative display on Calhoun may have special importance as a fighter against the Mexican army and authority there.

While Calhoun, like many others in those early years did not speak out strongly against slavery, he did originate the “concurrent majority” concept as well as “minority veto”—both of which have allowed the rise of a strong Civil Rights movement in America. Without this early gift of added power to minorities in governmental decisions, our Civil Rights movement might now be decades behind.

A number of radical leftist groups have been pushing for many years to have all Confederate and many national statues of founding fathers removed from the American landscape. This campaign has been for various reasons but often involves the “propaganda push” of some groups who originate outside of the United States, as well as radical Marxist-led groups pushing for destruction of traditional government in America and anarchism to reign.

 

Lisa Carol Rudisill, M.T.S., is a magna cum laud graduate of NC State University and Liberty University where she earned a Master of Theology. She writes novels about her family history during the Civil War in North and South Carolina. She is a freelance writer, editorialist and a contributor to The Standard newspaper.

Please “like”, comment, share with a friend, and donate to support The Standard on this page. Become a Patron!

 

Donate Any Amount