The Tribune

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.”

So says William Shakespeare as Juliet longs for Romeo though finds that it “tis but thy name that is my enemy”.

But what of the name of the British Colonial Hotel?

The newly reopened hotel has come under some criticism for retaining the name it has held down the years.

At the opening ceremony on Monday, Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis celebrated the history of the hotel – including its name, saying that “the meaning within the imperial legacy of that name has changed”.

He added: “It now signals the grand tradition of what tourism was automatically once assumed to be: travel to unknown places, in the hope of pursuing adventure, luxury, style, and comfort.”

Interestingly, while flagging up the tradition of a hotel, which dates back to 1901, although he says “the rest is history”, he neglects to note that for much of that history not all Bahamians were able to take part equally.

For a long time, race was an issue that divided Bahamians. People of colour were barred from hotels and restaurants in Nassau, and from the whites-only Savoy movie theatre on Bay Street.

It was a resolution on January 23, 1956, by then Tribune editor and publisher Sir Etienne Dupuch that ended such discrimination in The Bahamas, and changed the racial landscape in the country forever.

But at a time when such an injustice continued to take place, so too did that hotel carry the name Colonial.

For black Bahamians, there was no opportunity to pursue adventure, luxury, style and comfort in the hotels of the nation.

Sir Etienne spoke in the House, asking of the Speaker and 19 assemblymen present (with eight not attending), “Who of you tonight is prepared publicly to declare that a whole group of people should continue to live a life of daily and constant humiliation because it might mean the loss of some material gain. All the evidence in the world today dispels the fear of economic loss but even so, why should any legislative body, representing all the people, feel that they have a right to put a price on the pride, the dignity and the self respect of any section of the population entirely on the basis of accident of birth.”

He added: “The day is past in the world when classes and races can be divided by some cruel invisible line. The time has come when people all over the world have become conscious of the fact that human freedom is indivisible. It is a quality of mind that cannot be broken up into parcels and one group handed one set of freedoms and another given another set. There can only be one freedom – and it must be the equal and indivisible freedom of all the people.”

It was no easy thing for Sir Etienne to take such a stance. At the time, it was an unpopular movie. It cost him financially – and on the night of the resolution, he knew that he faced possible arrest. But it was the right thing to do.

It made a difference. Three days after the resolution, on Thursday, January 26, 1956, the majority of Nassau’s exclusive hotels announce that they were open to everyone, regardless of race, the only standard being good behaviour and proper dress.

The last hotel to make its announcement did so on Saturday, January 28, 1956. It was the British Colonial Hotel. The last one to declare there was no discrimination at their hotel.

Mr Davis went on to take about the rich history of the hotel – but discrimination is part of that history.

This was the last hotel in the country to lift discrimination.

Should the hotel’s name be changed? Perhaps, perhaps not. But if we are going to consider the history of the location, let us consider all of its history, and remember those people who were barred from a life of adventure and luxury.