Advisory Commission on Portraits Report and Recommendation to the Supreme Court of North Carolina December 14, 2020 Table of Contents Page INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................3 Commission Membership ........................................................................................................................ 3 Summary of Contents .............................................................................................................................. 4 PORTRAIT COLLECTION ...........................................................................................................5 THOMAS RUFFIN .........................................................................................................................5 INDIVIDUAL STATEMENTS .......................................................................................................8 Statement of Bree Newsome-Bass .......................................................................................................... 8 Statement of Dr. Lyneise Williams ........................................................................................................ 10 APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................... 12 About the North Carolina Judicial Branch The mission of the North Carolina Judicial Branch is to protect and preserve the rights and liberties of all the people as guaranteed by the Constitutions and laws of the United States and North Carolina by providing a fair, independent and accessible forum for the just, timely and economical resolution of their legal affairs. About the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts The mission of the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts is to provide services to help North Carolina’s unified court system operate more efficiently and effectively, taking into account each courthouse’s diverse needs, caseloads, and available resources. Report and Recommendation to the Supreme Court of North Carolina | December 14, 2020 Page 2 of 12 Introduction The Advisory Commission on Portraits was created by order of the Supreme Court of North Carolina on October 25, 2018. The Commission was charged with considering “matters related to portraits of former justices of the Supreme Court of North Carolina” and with promulgating a report and recommendation to the Court. In June of 2019, Chief Justice Cheri Beasley appointed the membership of the Commission; the group met for the first time on August 15, 2019. The Commission met six times over the course of the ensuing year to discuss portraiture in the Supreme Court. As part of the Commission’s work, Commissioners viewed the Court’s artwork collection, gathered information on portraiture policies of other state supreme courts, and shared news and scholarly articles relevant to the topic. In particular, the Commissioners read extensively about Chief Justice Thomas Ruffin’s complicated historical legacy as both a respected jurist and a proponent of racist ideologies. The Commission completed its work on September 22, 2020 by adopting the recommendations set forth in this report. Commission Membership The following individuals were appointed to serve on the Advisory Commission on Portraits: Catherine Bishir Bree Newsome Bass Dr. Paul Bitting Dr. E.B. Palmer Rachel Blunk R.E. “Steve” Stevenson, III Shelley Lucas Edwards Hon. Patricia Timmons-Goodson James Ferguson Dr. Darin Waters Hon. Robert N. Hunter Hon. Willis Whichard Michelle Lanier Dr. Lyneise Williams Danny Moody The Commission was co-chaired by Michelle Lanier and Danny Moody. Report and Recommendation to the Supreme Court of North Carolina | December 14, 2020 Page 3 of 12 Summary of Contents This report contains the final recommendation of the Advisory Commission on Portraits as well as letters to the Court from individual members of the Commission and an appendix of the documents considered by the Commission. Further information about the Commission’s work, including the agenda and minutes for each meeting and a video recording of the final three meetings, can be found at the NC Courts website. Report and Recommendation to the Supreme Court of North Carolina | December 14, 2020 Page 4 of 12 Portrait Collection The art collection currently housed in the Justice Building consists of approximately 150 portraits, busts, photographs, and other pieces. The majority of the collection is made up of portraits of former justices of the Supreme Court of North Carolina, with portraits of former associate justices displayed in the third-floor corridor and portraits of former chief justices displayed in the courtroom. In 1999, the Supreme Court of North Carolina entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) transferring ownership of the Court’s artwork to the North Carolina Museum of History, Department of Cultural Resources. According to the terms of the MOU, “the physical location of the artwork shall remain at the Supreme Court building and shall not be removed from the Court without the Court's written approval of its removal.” Thomas Ruffin Much of the Commission’s discussion and its ultimate recommendation focus on the portrait of Chief Justice Thomas Ruffin. Ruffin’s larger-than-life-sized portrait is the centerpiece of the Supreme Court courtroom, not only because of its dimensions but also because of its placement: the portrait hangs directly behind the Chief Justice’s seat at the center of the bench, flanked by two columns. Thomas Ruffin served as North Carolina’s third chief justice from 1833 to 1852, and has been perhaps the most revered judge in the state’s history. As scholars Eric Muller and Sally Greene describe a few of the accolades Ruffin has received, At the dedication of a heroic-scale bronze statue of Judge Ruffin at the entrance to the North Carolina Supreme Court building (now the Court of Appeals) in 1915, Governor Locke Craig called him "one of the greatest judges that our race has produced." In 1922, a dormitory was named after him on the UNC-Chapel Hill campus. Roscoe Pound secured Ruffin's reputation as one of the ten greatest judges of the golden age of the American common-law tradition, an honor proudly proclaimed in official histories of the Supreme Court of North Carolina from the early twentieth century to the present."1 The respect historically afforded to Ruffin is attributed to his reputation as a jurist who led the Supreme Court in crafting opinions that ushered in a wave of growth and progress, ending decades of economic stagnation. In more recent years, however, scholars have begun to reconsider Ruffin’s place in North Carolina history in light of his pro-slavery views and his active participation in the slave industry.2 1 Sally Greene & Eric L. Muller, Introduction: State v. Mann and Thomas Ruffin in History and Memory, 87 N.C. L. Rev. 669 (2009). 2 See generally id.; Sally Greene, State v. Mann Exhumed, 87 N.C. L. Rev. 701 (2009); Eric L. Muller, Judging Thomas Ruffin and the Hindsight Defense, 87 N.C. L. Rev. 757 (2009). Report and Recommendation to the Supreme Court of North Carolina | December 14, 2020 Page 5 of 12 In 1829, the Court considered whether a defendant, John Mann, could be indicted for assault against Lydia, an enslaved person. Lydia had attempted to escape a beating from Mann, and he shot her as she ran. Writing for the Court, Ruffin held that Mann could not face criminal charges because the threat of unrestrained physical violence was necessary to ensure that enslaved persons remained obedient to slaveholders. “Such obedience is the consequence only of uncontrolled authority over the body. There is nothing else which can operate to produce the effect. The power of the master must be absolute, to render the submission of the slave perfect.”3 Ruffin’s opinion indicates that he experienced some measure of discomfort with the outcome of the case, but that he felt the law compelled him to reach the holding nonetheless: The struggle, too, in the Judge's own breast between the feelings of the man, and the duty of the magistrate is a severe one, presenting strong temptation to put aside such questions, if it be possible. It is useless however, to complain of things inherent in our political state. And it is criminal in a Court to avoid any responsibility which the laws impose. With whatever reluctance therefore it is done, the Court is compelled to express an opinion upon the extent of the dominion of the master over the slave in North-Carolina.4 Ruffin’s allusion to the feelings within “[his] own breast” notwithstanding, he was an active participant in the slave trade, and a slave owner himself, with a documented record of cruelty that stood out as egregious even in its time. In 1824, Ruffin received a letter from a neighbor—himself, a fellow slaveholder—complaining of the “evil and barbarous Treatment of [Ruffin’s] Negroes,” including the “barbecu[ing], pepper[ing] and salt[ing]” of one of them.”5 A few years later, during his tenure on the Supreme Court, Ruffin severely beat Bridget, an enslaved woman belonging to an acquaintance of Ruffin’s, because she “gave [him] a look of insolent audacity.”6 Ruffin’s deep financial ties to the slave trade and his willingness to separate slave families are equally well documented.7 In October of 2018, the Raleigh News & Observer published an op-ed by Professor Eric Muller calling for the removal of Ruffin’s portrait