Resolution in support of changing the Massachusetts flag and seal (Substitute Motion)

Annual Town Meeting, May 2019

Legislation to the same effect had been introduced in 17 previous sessions by former Rep. Byron Rushing without getting much traction. There is more interest this year, and six Massachusetts municipalities have adopted resolutions supporting the bill.

The petitioner focused on the symbolism of the many elements of the seal, including the representation of Massasoit, chief of the Wampanoag tribe that helped the Plymouth Colony and later allied with the settlers against another tribe. One criticism of the image purported to be Massasoit is that it is a composite rather than an accurate depiction of Massasoit.

The seal was adopted in 1898. It was designed by Edmund Henry Garrett (1853-1929), an American illustrator, bookplate-maker and author - as well as a highly respected painter. The Advisory Committee heard conflicting reports on the artist's intent with regard to the various symbols.

Committee members also learned that the North American Vexillological Association ranked the Massachusetts flag 38th among 72 US and Canadian state, provincial and territorial flags. The main criteria were the appropriateness of the flags' symbolism and the ability to distinguish them from a distance. The resolution does not specifically endorse changing the seal and flag. Rather, it endorses legislation that would create a commission to examine whether some of the symbolism is no longer appropriate. Nonetheless, there was discussion of whether the image of an Indian was appropriate, discussion that will undoubtedly be echoed by Town Meeting members and the public. The petitioner stated that some Native Americans expressed distress at the specific image, though not necessarily at the idea of having an image of an Indian. Advisory Committee members suggested that there is nothing intrinsically derogatory about using the image of a Native American on the seal. We do not put the images of people or the composite representations them on a seal or on currency to dishonor them. And if no image of a Native American is included, we will lose a reminder of the importance of Native Americans in our history.

As can be discerned from the close vote on substitute language recommended by the subcommittee that held a public hearing on Article 28, Advisory Committee members were almost evenly divided. Some felt that the "Whereas" clauses in the petition were intended as political statements; others felt that they reflected history and were educational.

Whatever the artistic and symbolic merits or demerits of the seal and flag, the Advisory Committee agreed that a properly qualified commission should be appointed to study the matter.

The Advisory Committee rejected a motion to recommend the petitioner's language by a vote of 7 in favor, 11 opposed and 2 abstentions.

The Advisory Committee then voted 8 to 7 with 5 abstentions to recommend Favorable Action on substitute language that deletes the petitioner's first six "Whereas" clauses, substitutes three Whereas clauses intended to give context to the resolution, and retains the petitioner's last two Whereas clauses. The substitute language retains the substance of the petitioner's "Resolved" clauses, with minor edits.

No Recommendation