A Path Forward Exhibit

I am concerned that the exhibit, as described, will not provide a "path forward" for the community. The description states that the sculpture will "be part of a permanent and evolving exhibit at Macaulay Church." The exhibit cannot be both.

The description also states that the exhibit will be "interactive," without saying how.

Is there a plan for evaluating the exhibit and if so, what are the parameters? Is there a date when the exhibit, in whole or in part, will be changed? The proposal doesn't say.

It is evident from the "Have Your Say Comments" (and all the previous public discourse) that the matter of Sir John A., residential schools, and the Truth & Reconciliation Commission will not be resolved in an exhibit, even with 3 parts. It seems to me that there needs to be ongoing engagement by the County museums with the public, through a variety of activities that may lead to meaningful reconciliation.

This exhibit is didactic. I believe that other sorts of ongoing activities, such as theatre, music and art are more engaging. The exhibit proposal would be more convincing if it specified an end date and provided an outline for future museum activities to do with Truth & Reconciliation.

If the County proceeds with this proposal as planned, and I think it should not, who will pay for it? The Macdonald Project of Prince Edward County commissioned the "Holding Court" sculpture and presented it to the County of Prince Edward. Where did the Macdonald Project get their funds? Who was the MacDonald Project? Perhaps this new proposal, if it proceeds, should be privately funded. It's unclear to me why this should be a County funded project.

And, for goodness sake County, work out a deal with the Province to locate "Holding Court" at the Court house. Keep it outside for all to have viewing access.

Gary Westoll

The John A MacDonald statue was intended to mark JAM’s beginnings in our county. Unfortunately it was vandalized while on display in front of the Picton library. If the library location for displaying the statue is too controversial then I would suggest relocating the statue at the court house as it was meant to focus on the early professional life of JAM.
The genocide practiced by the Canadian Government and Christian organizations is another expression of man’s inhumanity to man. It needs to stand as an example of unacceptable behaviour. The racial policies implemented against indigenous peoples were in effect long before Confederation and continued overtly into the 20th century. To blame one man for this is very short sighted.
John A MacDonald was a politician and reflects the moral and ethical standards of his day. The display proposed for Macaulay Museum must condemn and explain the injustice of the era and not just single out one of its perpetrators.
I have to wonder how future generations will evaluate our action (or lack of action) by Canada against the Russian destruction of Ukrainian society.

As many others have stated, placing the statue in front of the court house seems most appropriate as does providing the historical context and multiple, informed, and truthful perspectives so that people can learn from it. What's that saying? If we don't learn from history, we are bound to repeat it. Engaging with Indigenous communities is vital as is engaging with the taxpayers of PEC. Happy to see that at the very least the County has provided this forum for all to engage and provide their input.

When finding solutions it is imperative that they will be be long lasting.
Statues of anyone are past their time. Statues historically signify power and authority since their inception in 2500 BC.
Therefore, the statue should be melted and used to create new art. Charlottesville, Virginia did this is 2011 with a statue of Robert E. Lee.
One can argue about the person's importance, place in history, etc. But these themes can be addressed through pictures, documentaries, etc. - there is no need for a statue.
In this the 21st Century let us move away from this antiquated forms of representing power and authority and rather let us move towards and inclusive and equal society that respects our past, present, and future and that reflects who we are now and who we want to be in the future.
Statues had a place once - just not in the 21st Century.

Macaulay museum did not want the statue in the original plan. This story is already being told by Kingston Macdonald house museum. The statue should not be in the county as it has no direct link with his time as Prime Minister or his effects of the residential schools . It should be donated to Kingston where people go to find out about this part of history. When people come to visit the county they want to know about the counties history not wide spread history especially when it is told else where. They want to know about this place its people and its stories. Our original mandate was to tell 100's of stories of the county and this statue and story belongs elsewhere. Macaulay has many stories to tell and should not be filled with permanent displays which remove curatorial work and new stories involve more people as their stories are told and makes use of the collection. New display attract revisits would you go back year after year to see the same thing. Don't loose site of the great stories that people love to hear about and sharing them keeps them alive. If you travel what do you want to know about the place you visit....what made this place the place it is today. Look at other museums in small towns to see why people visit and come back year after year, they love the stories. The statue belongs where its story can be best told and that is not in Prince Edward County as was told to this group way back when the idea first started the money could have been raised to sell the county history not glorify one person.
Diane Denyes-Wenn

I support the relocation of the sculpture to be part of a new exhibit that includes the history of residential schools in this area and their lasting impact as well as a much broader consideration of John A MacDonald's role in residential schools as well as his significant contribution to the history of Canada. I think the proposed description of the first space (with the sculpture) is much too narrow. As currently written, it looks like the first space is merely an excuse to park the sculpture somewhere and explain its origins and then tell another story altogether about the history of residential schools. That misses the opportunity to lay the groundwork for a much more thoughtful exhibit about the complexity of assessing one person's contribution to history through only one or two parts of that contribution. I suggest Space One of the exhibit should include the links of John A MacDonald to the County (i.e. why the sculpture was designed as it was in the first place...a young man who later became a key figure in Canada's history at the start of his career in Picton). It should also include a relatively comprehensive description of John A MacDonald's entire life span and his major role in the history of Canada, including his role with respect to residential schools. After visiting spaces two and three (or as a part of one or both of these rooms) - and without diminishing the significance of the messages planned about residential schools - there should be some sort of wrap around exhibit/discussion that provides the opportunity to reflect upon the whole man and the difficulty of assessing any individual's role in history in a few words or symbols (like a single sculpture) and in an entirely different context.

I abhor the re-writing and adjustment of history as the holier-than-thou in this County suggest. No one, absolutely no one with a conscience, condones the repulsive and appalling mistreatment that the Indigenous have had to live through. How do you know what your family upheld in the past? I for one, do not want my family history to be re-written. Remember that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. I like the proposal as is. Hiding MacDonald is not a solution. Having him on display will broach discussion and questions, and allow the onlooker the opportunity to form their own opinion.

There is to much mythology and many untruthful things going around and being said about Macdonald. It is very important that everything related to this new arrangement be factually and historically accurate and if that can't be done, it would be better to put the statue back in storage until it becomes possible to rely on facts and reality to study our historical record, not revisionist opinions. Blaming Macdonald for matters and developments that happened after his death, something that often happens, is reprehensible in the extreme.

- In 2015, the previous Council overstepped its authority at a politically controversial time, just as Macdonald's horrible national program of: physical, spiritual, and legal terrorism of native children and their communities began to emerge through the work of the TRC. The Christian Residential Schools is where the real war for indigenous lands was fought, by Christian missionaries against unprotected indigenous children. Macdonald's hidden legacy of national child abuse was already emerging in 2015, when the Macdonald statue project was being considered. The private donation was politically biased, in support of the old culture of British Christian Supremacy that lingers here. There were no JAM statues on Main for the first 150 years, why now? It was clearly meant to close political ranks amongst colonial die-hards in PEC, and it managed to radicalize most of County Council who went down the colonial rabbit hole of criminality, unwittingly.
- The statute of an immature, young and feisty Macdonald, holds no historic significance, hence no heritage value, since he was "an unknown", as portrayed by the artist.
- Three years ago, I believe I was the first voice to publicly call for the prudent removal of the Macdonald shrine, to a secure museum, where only those who are interested will be exposed to his likeness. While it may be difficult for colonial die-hards to comprehend without a dip into the cold river of compassion, there are millions of Macdonald victims in Canada today, who are as personally offended by the Macdonald statue, as a European Jew might be offended when confronting a statue of Adolph Hitler, being honoured in a public place today.
- Please ensure that Macdonald victims, and the disinterested public will be protected as well, and not be exposed to the Macdonald Shrine to British Christian Supremacy.
- Lastly, there should also be a fourth sector at the Macdonald exhibit, in which the thoughts of opposing County residents are presented. Those who disagree with the official narrative which has clearly failed to tell the historic truth, and who hold a anti-colonial view, should be able to document it at the exhibit. If our tax dollars pay for this exhibit, then it must begin to tell the painful truth about Macdonald's colonial and post colonial crimes, without using polite euphemisms that hide the truth.

I think the proposal for an interpretive exhibit about Residential Schools and their history is an excellent idea, and glad to see First Nations involved in its creation and development. Any exhibit materials should be informed by the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliatoon Commission.

However, I totally disagree with making the modern statue of Macdonald a centerpiece in the exhibition. It is a White Elephant that was gifted to Prince Edward County relatively recently. As such. I believe it has no historical value, and should be sent back to the organization that commissioned it, for them to deal with.

This is a wonderful plan. That is inclusive and gives insight.

Unless the word genocide is firmly connected to Macdonald and made highly visible in the first ‘phase’, the exhibit is just another whitewash.

I always thought it should be at the courthouse or beside Shire Hall, next to where his office used to stand on the corner of Bridge & Main ( Manlove Law) .Torn down in the 60s
Yes, he wasn't perfect or were the other 180 members of our 1st parliament. We aren't either, but if it hadn't been for them we would now be part of the US, think about that for a second.
The residential school issue is tragic, but that can't be laid at any one mans feet. Considering the 1st residential school ( the Mohawk Institute, in Brantford On ) was opened in 1828 & taken over by the Anglican Church in 1831 when MacDonald was 13 yr old, should speak for its self.
If people are really interested in History, they need to Stop doing their research on un-social media & Face book because there is a mount of great material out there. Just saying.

I think this is a step in the right direction. I would prefer to see TTO curate the entire exhibition - and decide whether or not the statue should be included. The statue (any statue) glorifies an individual. Perhaps keeping the statue is not necessary. It would be great to collect donations at the exhibition for TTO.

I agree with the idea of locating the statue at the courthouse but the second and third phases should be at St. Gregory catholic church as the catholic church ran these schools and probably are responsible for the deaths. The statue shows MacDonald as a young lawyer not the politician he later became and that's what it celebrates. As for the comments about other prime minister I agree because none of the ended the schools or improved the lives of the Indians living on the reserves that still to this day do not have decent housing or clean water. This is more important right now than saying we are sorry for what our ancestors did. That was the way of life in the 1800's, it's not much better now but we can't erase history, it happened, we can only say we're sorry for what your ancestors went through and hold the operators of those schools accountable for their actions. Teach more about this and educate people so hopefully it will not happen again. And lastly force our government to improve conditions in the poorer/ smaller reserves ,

Removed by moderator.

I like that the statue is no longer on Main Street. I want to say more positive things about this plan, like that two of the spaces are providing Indigenous perspectives, but it just feels all wrong. I appreciate that the intentions of the exhibit are good intentions, don’t get me wrong; but if we are going to make a permanent exhibit, let’s take the time and do it right.

I think if the overall plan were made by an Indigenous artist, it would be better. It feels very colonial in its approach. It is very linear, the colonial perspective is given first and many voices are simply not included whatsoever. This is typical of colonialism.

John A Macdonald created policies that caused harm to pretty much every group, except straight white men. He had a “complicated” relationship with women; he legislated the death penalty for homosexuals and the Chinese Head Tax; and let us not forget that he was a lawyer for the Confederate Army and then later “whimsically” made all porters on his beloved railway Black.

This exhibit needs to be reworked. That’s ok, just hire someone that’s not white or male or straight to design the overall layout. It needs to be decolonized, generally. Just my opinion.

The ‘Holding Court’ statue should not play any role in this exhibit. The statue was privately funded to commemorate the story of a young, privileged lawyer freeing himself from charges of a drunken bar brawl. Hardly a proud historical moment that Canadians want to remember of their first prime minister. The statue was imposed into public space in 2015 without a considered, community engaged process, and it shouldn’t be associated with any “path forward” related to Truth and Reconciliation. Pictures of the statue as a result of public protests, along with transcripts of community deputations, Holding Court committee and Council discussions, should be included in the exhibition, but not the statue itself. The best option would be to melt it down, sell the bronze, and use the funds to support and promote this exhibit and the important work being done by the Downie Wenjack fund.

Place the statue outside the courthouse, where it belongs. You got to look at the big picture. Admit he did wrong, but is there any politician who did not? They were different times, different mind sets. I am sure if he was in this time and age, he would rethink and realize how wrong he was with regard to the Indigenous communities.