THE MEANING OF A MONUMENT: MEMORIALZING THE CONFEDERATE DEAD OF

LAUDERDALE COUNTY

Jackson Gibson

History 400: Senior Research Symposium

December 8, 2017
 1

But yonder statue, standing beneath the Southern sky, as so

often stood its living prototype with firm foundation in the
soil for which he fought and died and which now receives
him into its generous bosom at last, that snow white statue
stands not only as a memorial to the Confederate soldier, it
also stands for all that soldier stood for, and ah, my fellow
citizens, what treasures he stood there to defend – honor,
constitutional rights, home!
- Dr. H. A. Moody of Florence, Alabama.

I. Introduction

In most Southern towns, you are bound to find at least one. To the citizens of those towns,

they are almost invisible. Representing a history which is all but lost on today’s generation, these

marble marvels are so commonplace in southern societies that most people fail to notice them in

their own home towns. Statues that commemorate the soldiers who died for the cause that was

lost in the American Civil War are, of course, pregnant with cultural significance. Some have

chosen to look at only one portion of their significance, namely their function of enshrining the

fallen soldiers of the Confederacy as heroes and standing as a reminder of our national history.

Others, such as Northern congressmen Adriano Espaillat and Dwight Evans, solely at another:

the statues’ inextricable association with the racial bigotry of those who erected them.1 These

men and many others have called for the banning and removal of confederate symbols that exist

on government property. The goal of this essay is to further the conversation in a way that

provides a new perspective on this sensitive topic; to create a fuller understanding of the

meaning of confederate monuments by analyzing the cultural motivations for erecting them. This

paper will focus on one, the monument in Florence, Alabama, which will act as a microcosm for

the debate that encompasses all confederate monuments. The findings of this research show that,

1
Cristina Marcos, “Dems unveil bill to ban confederate monuments on federal property.” The Hill, August 17, 2017.
 2

although the individuals who erected the monument did so in part for benign reasons separate

from any cause of the Civil War, the history of the Florence monument is steeped in a culture

inextricably tied to racist ideology.

This topic has been visited by scholars such as Kirk Savage, who argues that these

monuments stand for a new, more modern understanding of the American soldier, specifically

the “citizen-soldier,” which then shaped the memory of the Civil War and race relations for

future generations. Although Savage does address the topic of race, his thesis puts the focus on

the effects of erecting monuments rather than the causes, reasoning, and incentives for the

monuments’ erection.2 One of the more partisan arguments espoused was from George Schedler,

who argued in Racist Symbols and Reparations: Philosophical Reflections on Vestiges of the

American Civil War, that states that display “racist” confederate symbols should pay reparations

to its African American citizens, although the legal system in place in these states would be hard-

pressed to allow it. Schedler relied less on the constitutional arguments and more so on moral

and sociological ones.3 Martinez, Richardson, and Mcnich-Su argue jointly in their composition,

Confederate Symbols in the Contemporary South, that confederate symbols hold meaning in the

past, but exacerbate present-day controversies because their meaning has shifted through the

passage of history, thus different sides have differing interpretations of the meaning of

monuments.4 The argument that this paper proposes is based on the assumption that individual

2
Kirk Savage, Standing Soldiers, Kneeling Slaves: Race, War, and Monument in Nineteenth-Century America
(Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1997), 184.
3
George Schedler, Racist Symbol and Reparations: Philosophical Reflections on Vestiges of the American Civil
War, (Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc., 1998), 3-4.
4
J. Michael Martinez, William D. Richardson, Ron Mcnich-Su, Confederate Symbol in the Contemporary South
(Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 2000), 4.
 3

monuments can be understood to have their own meaning, and that meaning can be accessed by

understanding the context in which a monument was built.

II. CONTROVERSY

Hundreds of flaming torches illuminating hundreds of hate-filled eyes, staring down a

cornered cohort of college students fearing for their own safety and that of their friends. Racial

slurs and shouts pierce the night air, mocking, patronizing, and intimidating their recipients into

submission. The heat of fire licking feet as torches are thrown into a crowd of protesters. This

scene strikes a loud and shameful tone in the collective American historical conscience. In most

people’s minds it echoes events that occurred over half a century ago; a riot in Chicago or

Atlanta, or the lynching of a young boy named Emmett Till in Mississippi. But this explosion of

racially incited violence is much more tangible than the summer of 1919, or even 1955. On the

night of Friday August 11, 2017, the day before a scheduled white-supremacist rally, a well-

organized and armed group of over 200 white nationalists marched into the University of

Virginia in Charlottesville in order to protest the removal of a monument of Robert E. Lee,

chanting “Blood and soil!” and “The Jews will not replace us!” The racist group confronted a

student-led counter-protest of about thirty, surrounding them around a statue of Thomas

Jefferson, trapping them there, throwing their words and their weapons. A fatal blow, however,

would not be struck until the next day. On August 12, after hours of violent altercations between

demonstrators and counter-protesters, James Alex Fields Jr., who has been described as “an

admirer of Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany,” drove a car into a crowd of protesters, killing 32-

year-old Heather Heyer and wounding 19 others.5

5
Hawes Spencer and Sheryl Gay Stolberg, “White Nationalists March on University of Virginia,” New York Times,
August 11, 2017.
 4

Some might ask, “How could this happen? The Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964, so

we should be past all of the killing, the lynching, the segregating, etc., right?” However, it is

clear that racism and Ku Klux Klan-like organized violence is not dead in America. So, how did

this tragedy happen?

The events in Charlottesville made it the center of an ongoing debate between one

faction, spearheaded by Richard Spencer and the Alt-Right, which fights to keep the statues

standing, and another which calls for the removal of those confederate monuments. Even though

a federal bill introduced in August 2017 would, if passed, ban confederate monuments on federal

ground, many states refuse to follow suit, including Alabama. In May 2017 the state legislature

under the leadership of Gov. Kay Ivey passed the Alabama Memorial Preservation Act, which

bars the removal, renaming, and alteration of “monuments, memorial streets, memorial buildings

and architecturally significant buildings located on public property for 40 or more years.”6 In

Alabama, therefore, Richard Spencer has nothing to worry about; confederate monuments are

here to stay. The scope of this paper then, is not to decide whether or not one statue should

remain standing, but rather to clarify the origins of that statue in order to inform modern-day

opinions, thus creating a more uniform understanding between opposing sides.

The debate in Charlottesville became heated four months prior to the events of August

2017, on April 17 when the Charlottesville City Council voted 3-2 in favor of selling the statue

of General Lee to a buyer who “would be responsible for the removing and transportation of the

statue.”7 A collection of groups, perhaps most notably the Virginia chapter of the Sons of

Confederate Veterans, filed a lawsuit against the city, claiming the city cannot legally remove

6
Joe Sterling, “New Alabama Law Makes Sure Confederate Monuments are Here to Stay,” CNN, May 26, 2017.
7
Chris Suarez, “Charlottesville City Council Votes to Remove Lee Statue,” The Daily Progress, April 17, 2017.
 5

monuments or memorials to war veterans.8 Since then, there has been a heightened presence of

the KKK in the city, including a demonstration by fifty proclaimed members on July 8, which

resulted in the arrest of 23 counter-protesters.9 Today, outbursts such as these have simplified the

debate to black vs. white. White supremacist groups like the KKK want to claim these

monuments as testaments to their beliefs, and have done so since the Civil War era. This paper

provokes question, were these monuments for them in the first place?

In Florence, a movement has sprung up to educate town members about the history of the

monument that stands in front of the local courthouse. “Project Say Something” has become a

well-known organization in Florence; however, its goals are muddled. The mission of the group,

stated on the organization’s website is “to unify, educate, heal, and empower communities in the

mid south to realize social justice through non-violent communication and direct action against

racism, poverty and related forms of oppression.”10 Also prominently displayed on the website is

a video broadcasting racist rhetoric that Dr. H. A. Moody delivered at the unveiling of the

monument. At the end of the clip, a message is displayed on the screen, “The memorial stands to

this day in front of the Lauderdale County Courthouse in Florence, Alabama,”11 implying that

the statue’s very existence is an issue of social justice. Brian Murphy, a member of Project Say

Something and local historian, expressed that plans to erect a second monument juxtaposed with

the standing soldier have been discussed, but nothing concrete has come of it. Murphy also spoke

of some resistance from anonymous locals, including a “threatening letter” sent to one of the

8
NBC, “Charlottesville Files Documents in Lawsuit to Stop Removal of Confederate Statues,” July 12, 2017.
9
Hawes Spencer and Matt Stevens, “23 Arrested and Tear Gas Deployed after a KKK Rally in Virginia,” New York
Times, July 8, 2017.
10
Project Say Something. “Confederate Monument Campaign.” Projectsaysomething.org.
https://www.projectsaysomething.org/2017/09/confederate-monument-campaign/ (Accessed November 29).
11
Ibid.
 6

African American panelists at a Project Say Something-sponsored town hall meeting.12 This

would imply that there is a potential force in Florence willing to use violent methods to defend

the monument, similar to the protestors in Charlottesville.

In most cases this has become an ethical debate in which one side emphasizes the

meaning of the statue; what it stands for and why the erectors erected it, while the other side

emphasizes the effort to preserve national history. Everyone can agree that history must be

preserved in order for future generations to understand, appreciate, and learn from the mistakes

of their predecessors, but how are we to explain the motivations behind the individuals who

erected these statues? Of course, white supremacist ideology was pervasive in the South, and

heavily mixed in with individuals’ motivations, but what to what degree should today’s historian

recognize the effort to memorialize their kin, who laid down their very lives for their country? It

is illogical to assume that because society accepted the institution of slavery, all the soldiers who

fought and died to protect their country were themselves evil bigots. Is it correct then to

condemn a monument that represents the common soldier, a nameless private, who died to

protect his family and country?

II. THE FLORENCE MONUMENT

In Florence, Alabama, located snugly between the Tennessee River and Alabama’s

northern border, a confederate monument guards the town courthouse. The courthouse was a

popular site for monuments such as this one, a reminder to all who enter that bigotry reigns

supreme here. The Florence Ladies Association set plans to erect the monument into motion in

the late 1870s, just over a decade after the Civil War ended. Financial problems delayed the

12
Murphy, Brian. Interview by author. Personal interview. Florence-Lauderdale Public Library, November 18,
2017.
 7

monument’s completion until 1903, when the city formally unveiled the marble statue in front of

the town courthouse. There have been three major periods when the United States has seen

increased construction of confederate monuments, these being the mid-1880s through mid-

1890s, the turn of the century until the end of the First World War, 1921 through the Great

Depression, and the Civil Rights era.13 In the early 1900s a spike in monuments resulted as a

pushback against Reconstruction and any attempt to enfranchise African Americans. This

pushback was widespread and inextricably connected to every sector of life in the South,

especially at the political level.

A new Alabama constitution was adopted in 1901, which blocked the black vote by

implementing literacy tests coupled with a “grandfather clause.” This clause exempted any

member of the military or descendant of a veteran from taking the literacy test, thereby

maintaining the poor white vote. Since most blacks were not allowed to serve in the military, this

clause largely applied to whites only. The new constitution codified laws against interracial

marriage and established separate schools for blacks and whites. At the constitutional convention

the goal of the document was clearly stated, “And what is it that we want to do? Why it is within

the limits of the Federal Constitution, to establish white supremacy in this State.”14

The monument, a depiction of an unnamed Private in white Italian marble, traces its

origin to 1903. The Private holds his rifle with both hands, with the firearm’s butt touching the

ground, in a posture that suggests he has finally earned the liberty to lay down his arms. The

trend of commemorating the common soldier, instead of a grand figure such as a Lincoln or a

Lee, took hold in the last decade of the 19th century, making this particular statue a byproduct of

13
Southern Poverty Law Center, “Whose Heritage? Public Symbols of the Confederacy,” April 21, 2016.
14
Alabama Constitutional Convention, minutes, May 22, 1901.
 8

a national movement. This movement of creating representations of the common soldier failed to

include the black soldier, even though this was the first time in United States history when

African Americans were allowed to serve in the military, and did so by the hundreds of

thousands. Savage argues that this new trend in monument building was a method to recognize

the citizen soldier, as well as emphasize the importance of a citizen-powered militia. In Florence

this would have been widely accepted as a necessity for future conflicts, since the city suffered

from blockades on the Tennessee River and town occupation through the majority of the Civil

War.15

The statue’s shaft stands nearly sixteen feet tall and bears inscriptions on all four of its

faces. On the Northeast side, the direction in which our soldier faces, it reads “C.S.A. 1861-

1865,” and under that, “IN MEMORY OF THE CONFEDERATE DEAD OF LAUDERDALE

COUNTY.” Inscribed on the Northwestern face is a Jefferson Davis quote, “THE MANNER OF

THEIR DEATH WAS THE CROWNING GLORY OF THEIR LIVES.” On the Southwestern

face, “DEO VINDICE,” the motto of the Confederate States of America, which translates as

“With God as our protector.” And below on the same face, “GLORY STANDS BESIDE OUR

GRIEF.” On the Southeastern face the marble reads, “UNVEILED WITH APPROPRIATE

CEREMONIES APRIL 25, 1903, FLORENCE ALABAMA.” These were the messages that the

men and women of Florence wanted most to convey with their monumental contribution to the

city. However, there were certain sentiments that the erectors of this monument perhaps wanted

to include, but could not.16

15
Kirk Savage, Standing Soldiers, Kneeling Slaves: Race, War, and Monument in Nineteenth-Century America
(Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1997), 183.
16
The Florence Monument.
 9

Many proslavery forces in the 1850s approached the notion of visual representation for

the sake of propagandizing their cause with caution. These forces felt the pushback of

abolitionists who would appropriate the imagery of slavery for their own cause, thus vilifying

depictions of slavery as a confederate symbol.17 This very well could have deterred the Ladies

Association from including any mention of slavery or African Americans. At least, not directly.

A comment on their feelings toward this issue were indirectly mentioned in a reference to the

“appropriate” unveiling ceremony on April 25th.

a. Unveiling the Monument

In preparation for the unveiling of their long-awaited monument, The Ladies Association

in tandem with the United Daughters of the Confederacy elected Dr. Henry A. Moody, a local

medical practitioner and veteran, to deliver a speech at the ceremony. His speech is perhaps the

most telling piece of evidence to provide an answer to the question of why Florence desired and

constructed a monument. The speech, described as “eloquent” by The Florence Times, is a stark

dichotomy between honoring the dead soldiers, and condemning the entirety of the black race.

And as if to demonstrate perfectly the national feeling toward the topic of race, Moody allocated

a brief portion at the end of his speech to tell the world how Southerners felt.18

Moody’s primary goal, based on the time and space that he devoted to each subject, was

to honor and praise the men of Lauderdale County for their bravery. Moody describes the soldier

in his parable as a struggler who carries the weight of the deeds of his revolutionary ancestors, as

well as the horrors of war. Moody praised the soldiers for their commitment to piety and holy

17
Kirk Savage, Standing Soldiers, Kneeling Slaves: Race, War, and Monument in Nineteenth-Century America
(Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1997), 40.
18
Moody, Henry A., “UNVEILING MONUMENT: Eloquent Oration of Dr. H. A. Moody,” The Florence Times,
May 1, 1903.
 10

conduct on their journey home after the war was lost, “No law existed to restrain them, no fear of

punishment for their misdeeds. … Many hundreds of weary miles those disbanded soldiers

plodded to desolation or ruin[ed] cabin home. Yet there is no record of pillage or violence, no

stable robbed to save the blistered feet nor labor lightened to soothe pangs of hunger,” and in

reference to the monument itself, “[This] sublime import should render immortal those noble

heroes who would rather starve than steal.” Moody also invoked the pain of sorrow for the dead

that was so prevalent during the war, “But Sabbath after Sabbath as we went to pray for the

absent and their cause, more sable emblems of mourning appeared; till black was almost the only

wear. … Such are the memories that statue brings to those true hearts who served at home. To us

who served in the field it brings a host of memories also.” Since Florence spent most of the war

under Union occupation, this passage surely brought a host of memories to the younger men and

women in the crowd as well.19

The racist rhetoric appears in the final paragraph of Moody’s speech, introduced with the

words “And yet another message has that pure white figure for us, a message more wonderful

and of higher import than all the rest.” Moody pointed out that in the North, blacks are seen as “a

white man with a colored skin,” which he claimed created an impassable divide between their

cultures. In a reference to Teddy Roosevelt and Booker T. Washington’s 1901 dinner in the

White House, “When the highest representative of the Northern civilization invites the highest

representative of negro civilization to sit at his table as a social equal, he digs a gulf between us

too wide and deep for us to go to them or for them to go to us.”20 He also claimed a popular

contemporary notion, that God sent the flood of Genesis because black men married white

19
Moody, “UNVEILING MONUMENT: Eloquent Oration of Dr. H. A. Moody,” May 1, 1903; Lawrence Nelson,
“Memorializing the Lost Cause in Florence, Alabama, 1866-1903,” The Alabama Review 41 (July 1998): 181.
20
Moody, “UNVEILING MONUMENT: Eloquent Oration of Dr. H. A. Moody,” May 1, 1903.
 11

women, creating a “mongrel race.”21 The speech was a hit with the crowd, which The Times

estimated at 5,000. The Florence Times called Moody’s oration “one that reached the hearts of

the multitude. It was couched in eloquent language, brilliantly portraying the cause for which the

day was celebrated, and for which the monument was erected.”22 The fact that this speech was

spoken to celebrate the unveiling of the monument compels the current-day reader to believe that

this monument stands for a racist ideology above all else. Dr. H. A. Moody, however, had

nothing to do with the movement to erect the monument before its unveiling. History remembers

Moody as little more than a well-spoken, racist physician.

b. Slavery in Florence

If there were proslavery forces who shared Moody’s sentiments based in Florence, how

did they understand the institution of slavery? Slavery in Florence took on a different form than

the popular notion of plantation-plenty, black-belt, slave-driven societies. Kenneth Johnson, a

Florence-native historian, has done extensive work on this subject. The city hired from local

slave owners between three and eight slaves per year during the 1840s. These slaves would

perform all sorts of maintenance jobs for the city, “they maintained the streets, cleared trees from

new streets, dug or filled drainage ditches, built walkways and roads, planted trees, cleared the

river bank, repaired the town well, got water buckets out of wells, built dikes during floods,

removed snow from walkways, cleaned city offices, cut wood, and built fires. As this list

suggests, slaves did whatever job the town needed.”23

21
Ibid.
22
Ibid.
23
Kenneth R. Johnson, “Slavery and Racism in Florence, Alabama, 1841-1862,” Civil War History 27, no. 2 (1981):
157-158.
 12

During the years of 1841-1857, there was no full-time overseer. “Street hands” as

Florentines referred to them, enjoyed a relative sense of freedom, freely going from place to

place, working on the jobs assigned to them, but at their own pace and in the order of their

choosing. They were responsible for maintaining tools and caring for animals, conditions similar

to white workers of the time. Slaves were even allowed to hire their own time and earn money

for themselves. They were also allowed the freedom of public assembly; when black members of

the Methodist Church requested permission to host a fair, a common event among Northern free

blacks, the alderman acquiesced. The event was entirely planned and run by the black

community, and “in consequence of the state of the weather (rain having fallen throughout the

day, …) there were not a great many white persons present, – no ladies at all.”24 Florence did,

however, express its racist sentiments openly. Free black men in Florence, of which there were a

meager twenty-one according to a special census taken in 1857, paid higher taxes than white

men. Blacks and whites were also separated in the local cemetery.25

The prohibitions on blacks that did exist in Florence were rarely enforced. In 1942 the

town constable implemented a law prohibiting all “negro preaching,” at the request of

townspeople complaining about noise. Blacks continued to meet in their church, and no town

official stepped in. It is clear that the city never consistently reinforced this rule from its

reiteration by the town alderman six years later, prohibiting “Negro preaching or prayer

meetings.” Laws to further inhibit the freedoms of blacks were codified in 1853, e.g. a law

prohibiting a slave to live outside the immediate supervision of their owners. The existence of

this law suggests that before its enactment, slaves were free to sleep and reside anywhere they

24
Johnson, “Slavery and Racism in Florence,” 158-161.
25
Ibid, 159.
 13

deemed suitable. Town officials also established a ten o’ clock curfew. The town formed a

“vigilance committee” to enforce these new rules in 1861, however, only five months after its

formation, the committee “had ceased to function and black conduct was still not controlled.”

Florence made no further legal attempt to control their slaves’ conduct, however, one lynching is

recorded in the year 1861. The departed, Robin Lightfoot, was the first preacher of Church

Springs Methodist Episcopal Church. Florentines hung Lightfoot under the supervision of a

“Col. Johnson,” for “running about at night without control.”26 The only other recorded lynching

in Florence was the murder of Cleveland Harding, on March 24, 1907.27 Florence was a town

that supported the institution of slavery and racism, however, the notion of maintaining slavery

was never considered important enough to consistently enforce.28

c. Financial Troubles

Advertisement for the monument became a regular installment in the local newspapers. A

large portion of these news columns reported that the Ladies Association was in financial

troubles, caused by a regional recession in the 1880s and 90s, and called for the aid of the

citizens of Florence. A great deal of pathos was employed to motivate Florentines to reach for

their wallets, reminding citizens of the men they aimed to commemorate, “A far nobler and

grander work is yet undone. The base should be crowned with a suitable monument, to

commemorate and honor the dead heroes of the lost cause. Every home in Lauderdale has

contributed of its fathers and sons, whose life blood stained the honored battle fields of an

26
Florence-Lauderdale Public Library. “Slave Pastor Robin Lightfoot and His 1864 Martyrdom.” Facebook.com.
https://www.facebook.com/flplarchive/posts/10154498300223362:0 (Accessed November 25, 2017).
27
Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute. “Record of lynchings in Alabama from 1871 to 1920, compiled for the
Alabama Department of Archives and History by the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute.”
Digital.archives.alabama.gov. http://digital.archives.alabama.gov/cdm/ref/collection/voices/id/2516 (Accessed
November 25, 2017).
28
Ibid, 160, 162, 165.
 14

hundred conflicts for the cause they thought to be right which we honor and revere.”29 The

Florence chapter of the Ladies Memorial Association organized the monument fund in 1871, the

year that Mrs. Cutler Smith was elected president of the Association, and the funds quickly grew

large enough to build the base of the monument. The ladies accumulated funds until 1891, at

which time Northern Alabama experienced a “boom,” resulting in a regional depression. Nearly

one thousand dollars from the fund disappeared, and all the efforts of the patriotic monument-

builders wiped clean from the vault.30

By 1896 the people of Florence wanted this project prioritized and done, however, the

economic issues plaguing the city made it impossible for citizens to donate more than a few

dollars from their savings. Surprisingly, even the annual tradition of Decoration Day on April 26,

the anniversary of General Joseph E. Johnston’s surrender, at which time all the townspeople

were encouraged to gather to pay homage to their heroic dead, had “all but fallen into disrepute

and made a farce of.”31 By the late 1890s, the Memorial Association had received financial help

from the United Daughters of the Confederacy, which, coupled with new leadership in the

Memorial Association under Mrs. Weakley, elected in 1896, provided the cushion necessary to

continue fundraising. Association President Camper recognized the contributions of the U.D.C.

after the monument’s unveiling, “…We must mention the faithful work and able assistance

rendered by the Florence Chapter, United Daughters of the Confederacy. It was with the co-

29
The Florence Herald, January 14, 1897.
30
Mrs. William J. Behan, History of the Confederated Memorial Associations of the South, (Washington D.C.: The
Confederated Southern Memorial Association, 1904), 52.
31
Ibid.; Lawrence Nelson, “Memorializing the Lost Cause in Florence, Alabama, 1866-1903,” The Alabama Review
41 (July 1988): 182.
 15

operation and valuable contributions of this chapter that we were enabled to complete the

monument.”32

In further attempts to obtain donations from the citizens of Florence, newspapers

celebrated and lauded individual donors, such as Edward E. Young of St. Louis and Jason E.

Stacey, owner of the Florence Gas Company. The Herald praised Young as “patriotic” and

“manly,” for his donations, while also emphasizing the extraordinary effort that the women of

Florence exerted without help from their husbands, “The ladies of our city alone have struggled

to build the monument and keep up the semblance of an organization.”33 The people’s

desperation to finish this project is evident through The Florence Herald essentially shaming the

men of Florence for allowing the women to take on this task alone. The norms of the day

demanded that men protect, care and provide for their wives. This piece of journalism was meant

to illuminate the Florentine men to their disgrace. It should be noted, however, that Southern

women were used to this work and were performing similar fundraising feats all over the South.

As Caroline Janney points out, “Even the northern press held the Ladies responsible for

‘inflaming passions’ through their commemorative traditions.”34

Insult was added to injury in a publication four years later, once again by The Florence

Herald. In an article published on July 18, 1902, all those who donated to the monument fund in

the prior week were added to a “roll of honor,” and listed beside their name was the dollar

amount subscribed. Out of the thirty-two donors, twenty-seven were male, with the average

donation ranging between $0.25 and $2.00, however, a $20.00 donation was made by Mrs.

32
Mrs. William J. Behan, History of the Confederated Memorial Associations of the South, (Washington D.C.: The
Confederated Southern Memorial Association, 1904), 53.
33
The Florence Herald, March 12, 1896; The Florence Herald, February 17, 1898.
34
Caroline E. Janney, Burying the Dead but Not the Past: Ladies Memorial Associations and the Lost Cause
(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008), 2.
 16

William. F. Hardin.35 The Herald editor would not have expected such a generous donation of

anyone, especially not a woman.

d. Figures of the Movement

Mrs. Hardin cared deeply about the movement to erect the monument, in part to honor

her own family. Union soldiers captured and incarcerated Lieut. William Peters Bryan twice in

the first half of the war. He died of unknown causes (possibly by execution for desertion) in

1868. Mrs. Hardin herself saw action in the war. When her husband, nephew, and brother, who

had lost a foot in battle, were all released on sick leave in the winter of 1862, the family took the

opportunity to escape the war.36

On the night of January 15, 1863, the group of Confederate deserters made a perilous

blockade run at Wilmington, North Carolina, narrowly evading Yankee a cruiser, “We sailed out

on the Steamer ‘Hanser’ but were met by the ‘Pet’ coming in. The Yankee blockade squadron

heard the noise and soon they were in hot pursuit. The cannons roared and I was terrified, but

God was with us.”37 The family went from there to Cuba, then to Spain, and spent the rest of the

war moving across Europe where Hardin claimed to witness multiple Yankee recruitment

stations. In her time there she visited a friend of the family, a member of “quite a lovely society

of Southern people at Paris, France,” who told her of her oldest brother’s death. The entire

experience put the war in a new perspective for Mrs. Hardin as a war that crippled one brother

35
The Florence Herald, July 18, 1902.
36
Hardin, Mrs. William F., “Interesting Personal Experiences in the War Between the States: Graphic Descriptions
by Mrs. W.F. Hardin of events of Local and General History in a Letter to the Florence Chapter U.D.C.,” July 1,
1910.
37
Ibid.
 17

and took the life of another, and as a war so terrible that men whom she respected would choose

to flee their homeland to avoid it.38

Like many Southerners of the time, Hardin also approved of the Ku Klux Klan. In a letter

to the Florence chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, she wrote “I cannot describe

those terrible days, but of one thing I am sure, that many brave women aided the Ku Klux Klan

to organize. They made their uniforms with their own hands. They kept their secrets and stood by

them with unflinching devotion. In return the Ku Klux Klan were our only protection.”39

Hardin had personal interactions with the Klan as well. The Freedmen’s Bureau was

active in Florence during Reconstruction providing job contracts for emancipated blacks,

however there were a few on Hardin’s plantation who refused to sign them. When Hardin

demanded they sign the contract or leave her property, they ignored her and stayed put. Hardin

was startled in the night by a shriek from one of the house servants, “Oh Mistress, de Ku Klux

are here!” Mrs. Hardin steeled herself and calmly beckoned the hooded men inside.

“Immediately the halls were full of men in their queer costumes. One who seemed to be the

captain, asked me if the negroes were giving me any trouble. I told him they were all polite and

respectful to me, but a few had declined to either sign the contract or leave the place. He simply

said: ‘They will give you no further trouble.’ I begged them to be kind to the negroes.”40 The

letter in which Mrs. Hardin describes this scenario she wrote in 1910, seven years after the

unveiling of the monument. Her sentiment towards the Klan may have developed in that time,

but since the Klan had been active in Tennessee for many decades it is likely that she was aware

of the Klan’s role in society long before the monument’s erection. Hardin’s potential reasons for

38
Ibid.
39
Ibid.
40
Ibid.
 18

supporting the monument represent the public’s reasons well; on the one hand Mrs. Hardin lost

close family members to the war, loved ones she desperately wanted to honor, but she also fully

supported the Ku Klux Klan in their mission to suppress African Americans, and accepted their

services.

The city held numerous functions to raise funds for the monument, usually involving

feature events such as public speakers, operas, and lectures from local officials. Prominent

orators agreed to visit Florence and perform their services at no charge. General John B. Gordon

and Tennessee Governor Robert Love Taylor were two such speakers. In 1898 two Florentine

women, Mrs. John B. Weakley, Jr. and Mrs. J. Overton Ewin, ventured to Nashville for the

purpose of asking Governor Taylor to speak at a fundraiser, a request which Taylor cordially

accepted.41

Taylor, at that point serving his third term in office as a Republican, was well-known as a

compelling speaker who could draw large crowds. In Taylor’s first gubernatorial race he

attracted a crowd of eight thousand in Franklin, Tennessee, a rural town whose own population

was close to 1,500. This reason alone would have suited the needs of the Ladies Memorial

Association, however, Taylor as governor also passed a poll tax and new registration laws,

legislation that was intended to disenfranchise African Americans.42 In choosing Taylor as a

speaker, the Memorial Association made a statement about the type of man they wanted to

represent the monument movement. Taylor represented the youthful, laboring voters of the

countryside, and he appealed to them often, “It is nonetheless a fact that [Taylor’s] views while

41
The Florence Herald, February 24, 1898.
42
Daniel Merritt Robinson, Bob Taylor and the Agrarian Revolt in Tennessee (Chapel Hill: The University of North
Carolina Press, 1935), 64; Taylor, Bob Love Junior. “Robert L. Taylor.” Tennesseeencyclopedia.net.
http://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/entry.php?rec=1299 (Accessed November 24, 2017).
 19

in congress clearly reflected the attitude of small farmers of Tennessee. His indignation at

discrimination against the working classes in favor of the moneyed groups might well have been

expressed by Andrew Jackson or Andrew Johnson.”43 As a community of small farmers and

businessmen, it is clear that Florence would have been attracted to a politician like Taylor. In

choosing Taylor, the ladies of Florence chose a charismatic and relatable white-supremacist, but

they did not choose a man who served in the fight for slavery.

General Gordon was such a man, with a respectable war record, all the charisma of

Taylor, and a history of supporting efforts to commemorate Civil War veterans. In 1889 Gordon

was named the commander of the United Confederate Veterans, which was known across the

South via The Confederate Veteran, the organization’s official publication. In 1904, the UCV

boasted 1,565 camps throughout the South, including Camp O’Neal in Florence.44 Gordon

enjoyed wide appeal from his contemporaries, who regarded him as a gifted orator, “Clement

Evans claimed Gordon’s speeches had ‘the same spirit of dash and vivacity which were natural

traits of his character. By the strong force of his descriptive power and personal magnetism and

sympathy he would draw his audiences to the heights upon which he stood, causing them to

weep or laugh as he chose.’”45 Veterans especially had a great respect for Gordon since he was

the commander of their organization, and his physical presence won him the favor of others,

“One southern woman described him as ‘handsome, compelling, and magnificent on a horse.’”46

43
Daniel Merritt Robinson, Bob Taylor and the Agrarian Revolt in Tennessee (Chapel Hill: The University of North
Carolina Press, 1936), 55.
44
Gaines Foster, Ghosts of the Confederacy: Defeat, the Lost Cause, and the Emergence of the New South, 1865 to
1913 (New York: Oxford, 1987), 106.
45
Ibid.
46
Ibid.
 20

Gordon held close ties to the Ku Klux Klan, and was himself a respected member of the

Klan. The degree of his involvement is unknown, as he never publicly admitted to his affiliation

with the group, but upon speculation one cannot doubt that he was high within the organization’s

ranks. Daniel Wilson and John Lester refer to the general in their 1905 publication, Ku Klux

Klan: Its Origin, Growth, and Disbandment, as the “Head of the Klan in Georgia” under a

portrait in which he appears, true to form, a dignified statesman.47 As a Georgia politician, he

subscribed to the expectations of Georgia politicians, “they cut taxes, checked government

spending, limited government services, and kept the forces of social change at bay.”48 For

Florentines, Gordon represented the most important of Southern values: honor, chivalry, and

devotion to upholding white supremacy.

The Florence monument has a meaning separate from all other confederate monuments:

never forget the heroic dead of Lauderdale County. This is a message worthy of commemoration.

The 9th Alabama Infantry Regiment, including Company K, the “Florence Guards,” contributed

their lives in seven battles in the course of the war, including the second engagement of Bull

Run, Fredericksburg, Antietam, and Gettysburg.49 These men witnessed unbelievable carnage,

endured disease, hunger, and death for their loved ones. The monument that stands in front of the

Lauderdale County courthouse, however, stands for more than the remembrance of these men. It

stands for all they stood for: “honor, constitutional rights – and home.”50 The rights that Dr.

Moody spoke of, Abraham Lincoln made null when he declared, “that this nation, under God,

47
J.C. Lester, D. L. Wilson, Ku Klux Klan: Its Origin, Growth, and Disbandment (New York and Washington: The
Neale Publishing Company, 1905), 33.
48
Ralph Lowell Eckert, John Brown Gordon: Soldier, Southerner, American (Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana
State University Press, 1989), 240.
49
Steve A. Hawkes. “9th Alabama Infantry Regiment” Civilwarintheeast.com.
http://civilwarintheeast.com/confederate-regiments/alabama/9th-alabama-infantry/ (Accessed December 5, 2017).
50
Moody, “UNVEILING MONUMENT: Eloquent Oration of Dr. H. A. Moody,” May 1, 1903.
 21

shall have a new birth of freedom.”51 The Florence monument cannot be separated from its past,

a past that inevitably seeks to glorify the white race and to subjugate the black.

51
Abraham Lincoln, “The Gettysburg Address”, Abraham Lincoln Online,
http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/gettysburg.htm (Accessed December 4, 2017).
 22

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Behan, Mrs. William J. History of the Confederated Memorial Associations of the South.
Washington D.C.: The Confederated Southern Memorial Association, 1904.

Eckert, Ralph Lowell. John Brown Gordon: Soldier, Southerner, American. Baton Rouge and
London: Louisiana State University Press, 1989.

Foster, Gaines. Ghosts of the Confederacy: Defeat, the Lost Cause, and the Emergence of the New
South, 1865 to 1913. New York: Oxford, 1987.

Hardin, Mrs. William F., “Interesting Personal Experiences in the War Between the States:
Graphic Descriptions by Mrs. W.F. Hardin of events of Local and General History in a Letter to
the Florence Chapter U.D.C.,” July 1, 1910, Memphis, Tennessee.

Janney, Caroline E. Burying the Dead but Not the Past: Ladies Memorial Associations and the
Lost Cause. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008.

Johnson, Kenneth R. “Slavery and Racism in Florence, Alabama, 1841-1862,” Civil War History
27, no. 2 (1981): 155-171. https://muse.jhu.edu/ (accessed November 16, 2017).

Lester, J.C., Wilson, D.L. Ku Klux Klan: Its Origin, Growth, and Disbandment. New York and
Washington: The Neale Publishing Company, 1905.

Moody, Henry A. “UNVEILING MONUMENT: Eloquent Oration of Dr. H. A. Moody.” The

Florence Times. May 1, 1901.

Martinez, J. Michael, Richardson, William D., Mcnich-Su, Ron. Confederate Symbol in the Contemporary
South. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 2000.

Murphy, Brian. Interviewed by author at Florence-Lauderdale Library, November 18, 2017.

Nelson, Lawrence. “Memorializing the Lost Cause in Florence, Alabama, 1866-1903,” The
Alabama Review 41 (July 1998): 179-192.
 23

Robinson, Daniel Merritt. Bob Taylor and the Agrarian Revolt in Tennessee. Chapel Hill: The
University of North Carolina Press, 1935.

Savage, Kirk. Standing Soldiers, Kneeling Slaves: Race, War, and Monument in Nineteenth-
Century America. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1997.

Schedler, George. Racist Symbol and Reparations: Philosophical Reflections on Vestiges of the
American Civil War. Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc., 1998.