Quote:
Originally Posted by Shosh
As one of the attorneys who represented the members of the Lower Marion Board of Commissioners, I feel the need to expand this history a bit, because the impression being left is that Lower Merion Township refused to allow the Barnes to expand because of issues of race. (Whether individual Lower Merion residents wanted to financially support the Barnes is a separate issue, of course).
In fact, the Barnes LOST its lawsuit against the Township, alleging that the Commissioners had discriminated against the Barnes because of its affiliation with Lincoln and the race of its directors, because there was no evidence that race was a motivating factor. The Township refused the Barnes' desires to expand hours and increase patronage based upon fears (whether unfounded or not) of increased traffic, noise and congestion. Yes, they wanted their homes and neighborhood free of the masses who might want to view the galleries, but -- Dr. Barnes' intent notwithstanding -- the vast majority of visitors to the Barnes that the Township wished to keep away, quite simply, are not black.
In addition, on the eve of trial in a defamation action brought by the individual Commissioners against the Barnes and Glanton (literally, the night before trial was to start), Richard Glanton agreed to a settlement that included a written apology to the commissioners for his unfounded accusations. I have a copy of the apology he issued, as well as the one issued by Niara Sudarkasa.
Glanton was, indeed, a controversial figure, and not just in his position with the Barnes. I suspect that he had far more enemies in Philadelphia than fans. To say that he was, um, disliked just because of his race is simply not accurate.
|
Thanks for restating the facts of the lawsuit and the ultimate outcome.
My reference to "not wanting to give the money to a bunch of..." refers to the Annenberg and Lenfest Foundations and is based on one of the conditions they attached to their pledges to the Barnes, namely, that the board be expanded to the point where the Lincoln-appointed trustees no longer exercised control over it. Of course, I cannot say for certain that bigotry lay behind that decision, but surely you can see how the actions could be interpreted in such a fashion, as I did upthread.
As for the Township Commissioners, you are correct in describing the stated concerns of the neighbors, which in turn formed the basis for the Township's denial of the Barnes' requests. And, of course, the additional visitors would indeed have been overwhelmingly non-black, though more of them may have come from outside the upper and upper middle class than the existing stream of Barnes visitors. Again, though, I was presenting an interpretation that could be plausible in light of the neighbors' subsequent Hail Mary pass.
I will allow that the interpretation I presented doesn't really pass muster if I apply Occam's razor to it. Most of us have difficulty using that logical tool, though.
And you are definitely right that Glanton had more enemies than friends, at least in local power circles if not also among the general public. The guy did have a reputation for carrying a chip on his shoulder. Oddly enough, though, I suspect that he might have been just the sort of person Dr. Barnes would have wanted in that position, given his resentment of his own treatment by the local elite of his day.
In any event, I think we can all agree that the residents of Latches Lane are now learning the truth of the old saw, "Be careful what you wish for. You might get it."
09-05-2007, 10:56 PM
