Thursday, July 1, 1999
By CARRIE JOHNSON
Times-Dispatch Staff Writer

A picture of Gen. Robert E. Lee belongs on Richmond's floodwall, says a committee formed to study the gallery of images along the Canal Walk.

But the group has revised the set of murals and wants people to have their say about the images.

The picture of Lee, which shows him at his house on Franklin Street in Richmond, is one of nine new images selected by the committee for the gallery. It is not the same image City Councilman Sa'ad El-Amin declared offensive to blacks.

FLOODWALL MURALS When: Next Tuesday through July 11. Daily viewing hours are 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. and 5 to 8 p.m. Where: The images will be available for viewing in Salon A of the Richmond Centre, Fifth and Marshall streets downtown.

"It's a revised image of Lee -- a different image, a famous one taken of him at his home in Richmond after the Civil War," said James E. Rogers, president of the Richmond Historic Riverfront Foundation. "[It was] chosen in the context of it being related directly to his presence in Richmond after the war."

The committee's revised gallery includes several additional historic blacks but does not include dancer Bill "Bojangles" Robinson.

From next Tuesday through July 11, the murals will be displayed at the Richmond Centre. Members of the committee will be present to listen to comments from residents. After six days, the committee will review the response and make revisions if warranted, Rogers said.

El-Amin, who mounted a one-man campaign to have the portrait of Lee removed from the floodwall gallery early last month, said it doesn't matter what the image is; he doesn't want to see a picture of the defeated Confederate general on the floodwall.

"My view is, it doesn't matter whether Lee is sitting on a horse or Lee standing on the moon. It is still General Lee."

El-Amin said that while his position hasn't changed, he plans to talk to members of the committee and the public before speaking out against the new mural. He had threatened to call for a boycott of the Canal Walk if the first mural of Lee wasn't removed.

"We have a number of options," he said. "But I'm more concerned as to where the general community stands on this issue."

El-Amin also expressed concern about the process the committee used to determine the revised images. He said he was disappointed the group decided not to open its meetings to the public, calling its actions "closed-door, back-room manipulations that make this decision suspect."

The committee was formed after the portrait of Lee was taken down from the gallery June 2. The removal of the portrait prompted a strong public reaction, with members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans picketing the Canal Walk and disgruntled citizens flooding The Times-Dispatch with angry phone calls.

On Tuesday, the state and local NAACP announced their support for El-Amin and said they don't want to see the portrait of Lee put back up.

Members of the committee formed to study the gallery include several local politicians, ministers, historians and civic leaders. The group met for the first time June 14 and again June 16.

At the meetings, the group reviewed pictures provided by local historical organizations, most notably the Valentine Museum, Rogers said. From those pictures, they decided which needed to be added to the gallery and which removed.

The committee held its latest meeting Tuesday night at the law offices of McGuire, Woods, Battle and Boothe.

"This committee has been very, very helpful and productive," Rogers said. "Through this process, we have improved this mural collection of historical images and we have revised it as well, we think, to make it present history in a very effective way, a broader way. The feelings have been very positive."

Rogers said he's anticipating it will cost the foundation $50,000 to $60,000 for the revised murals.

Aside from the picture of Lee, the new images include:

• Chief Justice John Marshall.
• Judge Spottswood Robinson.
• A picture of office workers in 1918.
• Moses Ezekiel, sculptor.
• John Mitchell, newspaper editor.
• The battles for Richmond, 1862-1864.
• Powhatan Beaty, a Medal of Honor recipient in 1865.
• Abraham Lincoln in Richmond in 1865.

The committee also discussed adding images to the gallery in the future, including murals addressing the themes of education and architecture.

Mayor Timothy M. Kaine, a member of the committee, called the revised images a "significant improvement" over the murals originally planned for the floodwall.

He said the committee decided to set up the display at the Richmond Centre to give citizens a starting point for discussing the floodwall gallery as a whole -- not just Lee.

"We felt it was important to get public comment about something, not just public comment in the abstract," Kaine said. "We're casting our bread on the waters, and we'll see what comes back."

Tommy Baer, former president of B'nai B'rith International and a committee member, said the group was concerned with representing all 400 years of Richmond's history.

"I think we needed a balance, and I think we achieved a balance," he said.

Baer said it was difficult dealing with the city's history because there are certain aspects of history that some people may find offensive.

"But history can't be ignored," he added. "One can't select which part of history is going to be acknowledged."

Brenton S. Halsey, president of the Richmond Riverfront Development Company, released a statement yesterday praising the committee for its work on the floodwall gallery.

Collin Pulley, chairman of the Heritage Defense Committee of the National Sons of Confederate Veterans, said he was relieved to hear Lee's picture was included in the proposal.

"I think it's fantastic, and I'm sure we'll get a lot of support from the public for General Lee," he said. "I have no problem whatsoever with the committee's recommendation."

Melvin Law, chairman of the Richmond Crusade for Voters who also served on the committee, said that although he understands the importance of the Civil War in Richmond's history, he said he believes a picture symbolizing Richmond's reconstruction after the war would be better than a picture of Lee.

Law had to leave Tuesday night's meeting early because it was his 42nd wedding anniversary. He said he was surprised when he learned the next morning the committee had decided to make its proposal public.

"My personal feeling is that the committee should have taken more time before making a recommendation, but that was not to be."