The monument, consisting of a bronze statue atop a granite pedestal, honors Franklin Pierce, the only person from New Hampshire to be the president of the United States, serving in the 1850s.

However, the proposal was opposed by Republicans and members of the Grand Army of the Republic.They viewed Pierce, a Democrat, as a bad president whose pro-Southern United States and anti-abolitionist policies contributed to sectional tensions that ultimately led to the American Civil War.

[2] As president, Pierce became embroiled in controversy due to his support of the Kansas–Nebraska Act, which many anti-slavery advocates in the Democratic Party criticized for allowing the spread of slavery and for heightening sectionalism.

[5] Historians largely viewed the actions of Pierce and his presidential successor, James Buchanan, as contributing to heightening tensions that ultimately led to civil war.

[7] In 1893, Chandler, a Republican, led a campaign to erect two statues in the National Statuary Hall of the United States Capitol.

[9] Chandler promised Democratic politicians in the state that, if they would support his measure, he would support their campaign for a statue of Pierce to be erected on the grounds of the New Hampshire State House in Concord, New Hampshire, though while the National Statuary Hall bills passed into law, Republican legislators blocked passage of the bill for the Pierce statue.

[11] In 1911, another Pierce statue bill was approved by the legislature's Committee on Public Improvements and in late February came to the floor of the New Hampshire House of Representatives for discussion.

[11] While Keeler supported the statue primarily on the grounds of national reconciliation and in honoring a favorite son, other Republicans in the House, including many members of the Grand Army of the Republic, opposed the bill for similar reasons to in past debates.

[13] The height of the debate came on February 22 when Representative Rosecrans W. Pillsbury stated, "it was a poor time—on Washington's birthday—to press a measure for the erection of a monument to a traitor".

[16] In New Hampshire, Democrats took control of both chambers of the legislature and the governorship,[7] prompting the Daily Patriot to write in January 1913 that they expected a Pierce statue bill to pass that legislative session.

[21] According to Connolly, the reevaluation was fueled primarily by Progressive Era anxieties regarding society and race relations, and in this atmosphere, some historians attributed to Pierce "a superior wisdom, an admirable level-headedness in a hyper-emotional age, and a practical political sense more in tune with humans as they were, rather than abolition's idealistic and dogmatic fantasies on how they should be".

[20] Henry F. Hollis, a newly-elected Democratic Senator from New Hampshire, and his brother, Allen, urged the committee to select sculptor Daniel Chester French, their uncle, to design the monument.

[20] French, a New Hampshire native, said he would be willing to design the statue, but that he would need three years to complete the work due to preexisting projects of his, which was considered outside of the schedule set by the committee.

[30] This prompted Otis G. Hammond, the director of the New Hampshire Historical Society, to write to Chandler concerning White's involvement, saying it was "a serious error, serving only to revive a sectional feeling which has happily subsided ...

[28] The monument was dedicated on November 25, 1914,[2][10][7][note 3] with several hundred spectators attending the ceremony in spite of poor weather that day.

[10] In 2020, amidst the nationwide George Floyd protests and calls from some students at the University of New Hampshire to remove Pierce's name from the name of the university's School of Law, the Concord Monitor published an opinion piece from historian and editor emeritus Mike Pride wherein he discussed the statue's possible removal or relocation.

[38] In 1915, during a visit to Concord, the editor of the Boston Herald asked Chandler if the placement had been a deliberate choice in showing Hale condemning Pierce.

[38] Chandler acknowledged the coincidence, but denied any intention, further responding to the editor, "I must insist that the arm does not point the accusing finger, but the hand of friendship.