Lon Burnam and the Abolition of Heritage

By Joe G. Biles

In this enlightened age there are few, I believe, but will acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil in any country. ... I think it, however, a greater evil to the white than to the black race... .

- Robert E. Lee, 27 December 1856

Recently, State Rep. Lon Burnam of Fort Worth introduced a bill before the 77th Texas State Legislature requiring that the University of Texas "shall remove from public view all statues of Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States of America; Robert E. Lee, General in Chief of the Armies of the Confederate States; John H. Reagan, Postmaster General of the Confederate States; and Albert Sidney Johnston, General of the Confederate States Army, located on the campus of the university." The bill also adds that the statues "may be placed in storage away from public view or disposed of in any other way considered appropriate by the board of regents of The University of Texas System."

This bill is an insult to all Texans, southerners and Americans with a sense of history. It is a flagrant denial of our basic right to honor our ancestry, and a morally insidious manipulation of historical truth. Or it seems to be--Mister Burnam has much to answer for in this regard.

In my service in the Civil Air Patrol, I have, among other things, performed the duties of the Vice-Chairman of the Texas Wing Cadet Advisory Council, a group of cadets elected or appointed to represent their local Group to the Wing Commander on matters of the Cadet Program. I was always taught when writing a resolution one offers some kind of reasoning behind the proposal that fits comfortably behind the word "Whereas."

In my limited studies of politics, I've found it to be common courtesy that most bills have the same feature. There is no such reasoning to be found in Burnam's Bill. It is left to the Legislature, Burnam's constituency and our posterity to determine exactly why these statues should be removed.

And yet, we know. Deep down, the uncomfortable truth that even Burnam does not dare speak is that someone feels the statues at U.T. somehow honor the institution of slavery. This column is not the place for a historical debate. It is the place, however, for a little bit of common sense.

I am perfectly willing to concede the point that the secession of South Carolina on December 20, 1860 was motivated by fear of President-elect Lincoln's policies towards slavery. There were other reasons, but I am willing to concede to this point. The war did not begin there.

No, the war began because Lincoln sent armed troops to support the Federal forces at Fort Sumter--in Confederate territory--and we fired on them. Neither slaves, nor slaveholders, nor abolitionists, nor Republicans nor Democrats issued the orders. P.G.T. Beauregard did.

The writings of Union troops make it clear that despite whatever secondary intent of promoting abolition, they were fighting to preserve the Union. Burnam should ask himself this question: If, in 1861 (or 1862, 1863 or later), President Davis ordered the emancipation of the slaves in the Confederate States, would the Union army have stopped advancing southward, return north and leave the C.S.A. to govern itself?

The blame of slavery is misplaced on those honored by the statues. Lee was a deeply religious man whose convictions told him slavery was wrong. The only slaves he owned in his life were inherited and later emancipated. Davis certainly treated his slaves well--they had their own hospital on his plantation.

Burnam has yet to explain how a postmaster general promoted that corrupt institution. And frankly, if there is to be any blame placed upon Gen. Johnston by his descendants, it is for not defeating Gen. Grant.

The Civil War has only lately become of interest to me (and truthfully speaking, intense study of history has only been a fixation for a couple of years), but it has already affected my sense of heritage greatly.

However, in my research on the murder of President Kennedy, I have seen many the writer, the politician, the misinformer and the pundit willing to sell out historical truth for some kind of fringe benefit (i.e. Money, power, fame, position or simply political acceptability). I've learned a lot about human beings I frankly did not want to know. It took a long time for the scavengers to come for the heroes of the south. But they have come.

We've never had many acceptable heroes. Outside our region of the country, the only ones to be treated as "part of the club" have been Lyndon Johnson (not the most admirable of our ranks) and General Robert E. Lee. Now, one of our own wants to make Lee into a caricature of the villainous white slaveholder--rich, amoral and arrogant. For over a century, Lee has been the symbol of all that is good and noble of our society.

Rep. Burnam, by his own intent, seeks to destroy the true character of a great but humble man who sacrificed of himself for his state to the very end. Worse, however, is that by his oversight, Burnam may contribute to the destruction of the values Lee represented.

This cannot be allowed.

So I suppose what I'm saying is--in that typical, aggressive southern spirit--rather than removing our statues from their base with our hammers and chisels, let us instead remove Lon Burnam from office with our votes. I know I would sleep a lot better at night.