HistoryNet mastheadHistoryNetShop Summer Catalog

Dr. Samuel A. Mudd

American History  | 5 comments  | Print This Post  | Email This Post

In his affidavit protesting Dutton’s first allegation–about knowing Booth before the assassination–Mudd unwittingly let slip another damaging piece of information. In describing the Washington meeting referred to by Dutton, Mudd wrote:

Subscribe Today

Subscribe to American History magazine

We [Mudd and Booth] started down one street, and then up another, and had not gone far when we met Surratt and Wiechmann. Introductions took place and we turned back in the direction of the hotel….After arriving in the room, I took the first opportunity presented to apologize to Surratt for having introduced him to Booth–a man I knew so little concerning. This conversation took place in the passage in front of the room [hallway] and was not over three minutes in duration….Surratt and myself returned and resumed our former seats (after taking drinks ordered) around a center table, which stood midway the room and distant seven or eight feet from Booth and Wiechmann; Booth remarked that he had been down to the country a few days before, and said that he had not yet recovered from the fatigue. Afterward he said he had been down in Charles County, and had made me an offer to purchase of my land, which I confirmed by an affirmative answer; and he further remarked that on his way up [to Washington] he lost his way and rode several miles off the track.12

In his revealing statement, Mudd confirmed a second visit to Charles County by Booth just prior to the December 23 meeting at the National Hotel–a trip that, by Mudd’s own admission, included a visit to his property. This was the important other meeting.

Independent evidence that Booth visited Charles County in December can be found in the trial testimony of John C. Thompson. Thompson was the man who had originally introduced Booth to Mudd in November 1864 at St. Mary’s Church, as Mudd had already acknowledged in his statement given prior to his arrest. Thompson was the son-in-law of Dr. William Queen, a prominent Confederate operative who Booth also visited during his November trip to Charles County. During questioning by one of Mudd’s attorneys, Thompson was asked if he had seen Booth again after the meeting where he had introduced Booth to Mudd in November. Thompson answered: I think some time, if my memory serves me, in December, he came down a second time to Dr. Queen’s house….I think it was about the middle of December following after his first visit there.13

It is clear from both Mudd’s own statement in his affidavit of August 28, 1865, and Thompson’s testimony during the trial that Booth visited the Bryantown area in Charles County a second time, in mid-December 1864. And it is in his own affidavit that Mudd admits to meeting with Booth during this second visit.

While Mudd claimed that Booth stayed overnight at his house and purchased a horse from his neighbor, George Gardiner, during the November meeting, several pieces of evidence show that those incidents occurred during Booth’s December visit, not in November. The first piece of evidence is found in a letter Booth wrote to J. Dominick Burch, who lived in Bryantown and worked at the Bryantown Tavern. Written from Washington, D.C., the letter is dated Monday, November 14, 1864, the day Mudd claims he accompanied Booth to Gardiner’s farm, where Booth supposedly purchased a one-eyed horse.14 The letter clearly places Booth in Washington on November 14, and makes it clear that Booth traveled by stagecoach and not by horse.

In his letter, Booth refers to an object he left on the stage last Friday (November 11). Booth implies from his description that the object was a gun, which he took from my carpetbag. Its [sic] not worth more than $15, but I will give him $20 rather than lose it, as it has saved my life two or three times.15

The second piece of evidence refuting Mudd’s statement concerning the November purchase of a horse is a memorandum prepared for use at the military trial by George Washington Bunker. Bunker was a clerk at the National Hotel, where Booth stayed when in Washington. Bunker prepared an abstract of the hotel ledger for the trial prosecutors in the form of a memorandum, in which he listed Booth’s comings and goings from the hotel during late 1864 and 1865.16 Bunker noted that Booth had checked out of the National Hotel on Friday, November 11, 1864, and had returned on Monday, November 14. In December, Bunker’s memorandum shows that Booth checked out of the National Hotel on Saturday, the 17th, and did not check back in until Thursday, the 22nd, the day before he met in his hotel room with Mudd, Surratt, and Weichmann. It was during that period, December 17-22, that Booth returned to Charles County and met with Mudd.17 And it was at that time that Booth stayed the night at the Mudd home and purchased the horse from Mudd’s neighbor, George Gardiner.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Tags: , ,

HistoryNet.com Subject Locator
  1. 5 Comments to “Dr. Samuel A. Mudd”

  2. I met Mudd’s grandson, 20 years or so ago. He invited me to his house in Saginaw, Mi. He had me convinced. But after more reading and research, I have probably come to the conclusion that Mudd did know Booth. He did realize soon on that it was Booth whose leg he was fixing. And I think that he probably told Mudd that he had just shot Lincoln. I’m still not convinced that he had anything to do with the assassination or kidnappng beyond that. Getting life in prison (although pardoned by Johnson) seemed a bit harsh. I think 10 years would have covered it.

    By Randy on Jun 19, 2008 at 7:35 pm

  3. Mudd was guity then and he is guity now,his name is mudd for a reason.

    By katie kennedy on Jan 17, 2009 at 11:21 pm

  4. I am trying to rember to famous actor ….female…..that was performing at Ford Theatre the night Booth assisinated President Lincoln. Does anyone know? Thank you,

    By Barbara Renfrow on Mar 18, 2009 at 7:11 pm

  5. Barbara,

    It was Laura Keene, playing in the 1000th performance of Our American Cousin.

    Regards,
    Archie

    By A. MacLean on Jun 2, 2009 at 6:47 pm

  6. Unfortunately, based, no doubt, on John Ford’s treatment of Mudd in his 1936 film, The Prisoner of Shark Island, the modern view of Mudd’s complicity in the Lincoln assassination has been blurred considerably. In tfiis work, written for the screen by Nunally Johnson, a Georgian, Mudd is seen as simply a doctor who helps strangers who come to his door late at night. Not only did he not know Booth, acording to the film,he did not recognize him when he came to his house then. The film further resurrects all sorts of racist themes, like the carpetbagger myth, the good slave owner (Mudd!), the hapless slaves, Northern brutality (a Northern soldier breaking the doll of Mudd’s daughter in front f the girl (!), etc. None of the facts of Mudd’s complicity, or the trial transcript with incriminating evidence are presented. In fact, Ford intentionally misrepresents history by suggesting that there was no evidence whatsoever of Mudd’s guilt when the reverse is true. He bases the movie entirely on the self serving fabrication of Mudd’s daughter, who penned a tribute to her father.

    By cliff meneken on Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 pm

Post a Comment

Please note that HistoryNet Staff cannot respond to requests for research of any type. Please visit our research forum to post research questions. If you have a question about our magazines, please use the contact us form.

Related Articles



SPONSORED SITES







HistoryNet Article Archives Historynet Spacer

OPINION POLL

Which of these World War I aircraft was the best fighter plane?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

See previous polls

STAY CONNECTED WITH US

RSS Feed
 
Get Our Daily HistoryNet Email
 
 


What is HistoryNet?

The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines.

If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest.

 Get our RSS!
 Newsletter Signup

From Our Magazines

Weider History Group

Weider History Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer!

Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Contact Us|Advertise With Us|Subscription Help