Kincardine council has had their discussion for the fate of the Secord monument.
The memorial, which was dedicated to Dr. Solomon Secord, was intended to remember his humanitarian contributions to the community, where he served as a doctor for fifty years.
However, the monument also referred to the fact that during his life, Secord had served as a physician for the Southern (Confederate) Army during the American Civil War.
The plaque on the front of the monument, under a sundial, reads:
“I mark the Sunny Hours.
To Solomon Secord, 1834-1910.
Our family physician for 50 years.
This memorial was erected by his loving friends. Served as a surgeon with the Southern Army during the American Civil War. All that lived he loved, and without regard for fee or reward, he did his work for the love of his fellows.”
The memorial sat in front of the Kincardine library, but had to be moved in the spring of 2023 during the reconstruction of Queen Street. Once the work was finished, questions were raised whether the monument should be put back in its approximate original position, or whether it should be put elsewhere due to the context of the memorial.
This led to the engagement of a consultant from outside the community, Dr. Laura Mae Lindo.
Dr. Lindo worked with council, staff, and residents of the municipality as an impartial third party, so that everyone’s opinions could be heard.
During opening remarks at the beginning of council’s discussion on Wednesday, Mayor Ken Craig had said that he felt it appropriate to decommission the monument.
The municipality has two other memorials to Secord in the community – a monument in Kincardine Cemetery, and a display at the Walker House in Kincardine.
Each member of council had a chance to speak, sharing their thoughts and feelings regarding the issue.
Mayor Craig started things off.
“There are a lot of things about this monument that we know, and there [are] a lot of things that we do not know. We know of Dr. Secord’s humanitarian service, his passion, his compassion, his medical abilities, and his friends’ and colleagues’ admiration of who he was,” he began. “But we do not know for sure the motives or the mindset behind why he did, what he did, where he did. Where the motives of his colleagues of erecting a second monument to Dr. Secord. We know at the time of dedication, the words on the plaque were culturally accepted. And we know now, that, as in many situations, past language does not reflect present attitudes, or the desired acknowledgement and respect of all humanity.”
Prior to opening the floor to the rest of council, he wanted to reaffirm that regardless of the decision, he wanted to make sure that non-white community members were safe from backlash voiced by those in favour of keeping the monument in the community.
“Let not the removal of this monument be cause for harm in any way, to any man, woman, or child. Dr. Secord took the [Hippocratic] oath: do no harm.”
His request comes after incidents within the community over the past weeks, where some people have been upset regarding discussions surrounding the monument.
Ahead of Dr. Lindo’s most recent meeting with council, there had been instances of people online saying that they wanted to deface the Afro-Centric mural at the Davidson Centre, as a kind of retribution for the discussions at hand, and the chance that the Secord monument would be removed from the public eye.
Councillor Rory Cavanagh made reference to these ideals, also noting that on Highway 21 that there is a billboard on private property stating that “White Lives Matter”, and the fact that putting Black voices at the forefront of discussions should be a priority.
Cavanagh outline the nuances that led to his decision.
“There are those in the community that see the monument as racist and problematic and desire a change in the status quo. That are also those who see the historical significance of the monument and what Dr. Secord monument meant to our community, and in some cases rate this as a greater priority than any concerns for racial or social issues. Finally, I also want to acknowledge that there is a significant segment of our community that can see both the historical and racial components, and to their full credit, acknowledge that these values are competing for an outcome here.”
He continued, saying that prior to the discussion, he expected that the resolution would be a compromise.
“To that end, I was originally inclined to pursue an option where the monument could be removed from municipal property, and preserved and relocated to the museum with additional information, context, education, and recontextualization,” Cavanagh said. “I had hopes that this would allow the community a way forward in a process of healing. However, as the mayor has shared, the option to receive the monument has been declined by the museum, the Walker House, the legion, and the hospital. This additional information really makes that sort of solution much less tenable.”
Councillor Mike Hinchberger, who had done considerable research into Dr. Solomon and his involvement both in the context of the Civil War and his longtime involvement within Kincardine had also taken time to consider what alternatives could be considered with the fate of the second Secord monument.
Hinchberger shared his findings, stating, “Regardless of his personal views on slavery, there’s an absence of primary reference to support the notion that Dr. Secord was an active abolitionist at the time of the Civil War. Records indicate that he willingly went to Georgia in 1860, there’s no indication he was pressed into service with the Confederate Army in 1862, and subsequent to being captured by Union forces at Gettysburg in 1863, escaped and returned to the Confederacy.”
He shared that prior to all of the council discussions about the monument, he did think that there was historical value for the monument, and that it would be better in a more fitting location.
“Given his area of [Secord’s] contribution, I had thoughts to relocating it to the hospital or medical centre grounds,” said Hinchberger, but given previous information, that was no longer possible. “One thing that hasn’t changed for me… is the status quo… Returning the monument to the library unchanged is not acceptable. That has not changed for me. At this moment, and through the past several months of reflection and I’m told [a number] of discussions, removing the wording alone feels more like removing some letters and erasing the issue, rather than addressing it. Altering the monument with some additional working or additional plaques to set context seems almost impossible, given what I described earlier.”
Around the council table, each member shared that when the topic of the Secord sundial monument first came before council in January 2024, they were conflicted about what to do. Through the consultation process and through discussions with community members, they were able to make their decisions.
“I’m at the point where I’m tired of the divisiveness in our society. The things that have happened over the past four years has put people against each other and this monument is doing that in this little microcosm of our community even more,” said Councillor Jennifer Prenger. “I’ve made a decision to try to foster bringing people back into the fold and having empathy for everyone; people on each side, even though that’s difficult sometimes.”
Councillor Bill Stewart was the only one to voice concerns about decommissioning the monument, saying “This issue should [in] no way ever come up to council. It’s cause us to fracture the community and fracture the council. Our responsibility to the community is not to be the moral compass.”
He continued, “We’re not really supposed to be involved with things like this, even if the community asks us to be involved. It’s a very difficult decision. I’m looking around the room, people are crying, people are very emotional. The community is very emotional about this. Whether we say yes or no, we’re going to hear about it, unfortunately. So I hope it’s a valuable lesson for us as council, that we sort of steer away from this kind of stuff. This kind of racism is dealt with at home, church, schools, and things like that.”
Deputy Mayor Andrea Clarke shared that while reflecting on the information and the opinions and views from community members on how to have a creative solution that could make people happy.
“The journey has been one that has been difficult to navigate, I must admit. The first phase of the survey was difficult and painful to listen to some of the comments. They were pretty raw,” she explained. “It was harsh, and it was real, and I perhaps did not have a good understanding at that stage as to why the comments were being made, or to the extent some individuals wished to hold onto history.”
She said that she was relieved when she heard the feedback from a phase of small group conversations held by Dr. Lindo. “What came out of that was overwhelmingly the desire by our community to heal, to be educated, and to move past.”
Clarke said that it was important to acknowledge history, but not necessarily make it the only part of the community’s identity.
“When we look at the monument itself, and perhaps less about Dr. Secord – because there are so many unanswered questions – the inscription as it reads, pays homage to his service as a surgeon for the Southern Army during the Civil War. We know, categorically, the Southern Army in the Civil War were on the wrong side of history. They lost the war, they sought to dehumanize a group of people based on race. They lost, we’re all better for it. So when we have an inscription centred on a monument such as that, it becomes problematic any way that you look at it.
“There have been much discussions about the need to remember history. The removal of the monument, certainly for me, in no way is eradicating history. I have no doubt that the Civil War will continue to be studied in schools, [or] something that will be learned about in museums. But there is a distinguishable difference between remembering history, and revering history.
“There are certain aspects of history that we do not wish to put on a pedestal, or revere in any manner. The Civil War, when we talk about the Confederate Army, is one of them. And we know that monuments such as these were done intentionally. They weren’t erected necessarily to honour the men that were on these monuments. They were part of a movement: the Cult of the Lost Cause. They were re-writing history. We must be careful when we sanitize history. We must remember history for its faults. As well, as for the victories that occurred. When we acknowledge history, we absolutely will learn from it. And we hopefully will not repeat it.”
Council voted in favour of decommissioning the monument, with only Councillor Stewart voting in opposition.