Release of slavery report sees no furor

Two years ago, administrators commissioned a hard-cover book, a feature-length documentary and a historical photo gallery celebrating the university's 150th anniversary.

None of the memorabilia mentioned the slaves who played a critical role in the construction of the campus.

The omission angered professors and students in a controversy that culminated with university President Dan Mote's decision to explore the university's ties to slavery through an undergraduate research course. The course's students released their findings last Friday, and Mote issued a statement of regret. But even with a student report strongly suggesting that slave labor played a role in the university's founding, many of the voices that cried foul two years ago seem to have simmered.

In March 2007, five faculty members penned a letter to The Diamondback calling the university's response to its history with slavery "unconscionable and irresponsible," and decried the "cavalier dismissal of the contributions of those who endured slavery in the history and the making of this university."

This week, four of them did not return repeated calls for comment. The one who did responded with a four-word e-mail.

"I have no comments," wrote Willie Brown, director of policy and planning for the Office of Information Technology.

Government and politics professor emeritus Ron Walters, however, said he wished Mote had taken the step of apologizing for the university's profit off slaves.

He said Mote's comments did not surprise him — students found no definite proof slaves built the campus and the General Assembly had already issued a statement of "profound regret."

"For him to have gone beyond what the state did with the issue, I think it would have raised some eyebrows," Walters said, adding that he found Mote's comments "appropriate."

Still, Walters, who has written extensively on slavery and black America, said the first step in racial reconciliation is an admission of wrongdoing. From there, he said administrators should work to  address the needs of today's black students, citing the recent news that black enrollment decreased 28 percent in this year's freshman class.

"The university might have just assumed that its African-American numbers were going to be OK, except that has not been the case," Walters said. "The university should have been on guard to have done something extra to try to deal with that question."

Dottie Bass, the assistant director for outreach and programming in the Office of Multi-Ethnic Student Education, offered another route administrators could take to act on the students' report on slavery when it was unveiled Friday. She suggested the university make the report next year's first-year book.

Many universities, including Brown University and University of North Carolina, have issued high-profile apologies for slavery. But the matter of whether this university should formally apologize remains a  question.

Wanika Fisher, the founder of the current incarnation of the university's chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, drew a clear distinction between a statement of regret and an apology.

"When you apologize for something, you're owning," Fisher said. "I don't think we're owning up to our past. A statement of regret is an easy way out."

Other student leaders had less to say. Mark Conway, the president of the NAACP's university chapter, said he had not read the report. Black Student Union President Amber Simmons did not return several calls seeking comment.

slivnick at umdbk dot com