Dr. Samuel A. Mudd: Innocent vs. Guilty.

I will try to post more often. I always mean to, but I forget and something else takes over.

Recently, I have begun studying the assassination of President Lincoln and the men who were behind the conspiracy. One of the men who was caught up in the whole mess was a young doctor from Charles County, Maryland by the name of Samuel Alexander Mudd. On April 15, 1865, in the early morning hours, J.W. Booth stopped at Mudd's house and had his leg set after he had broken it jumping from Lincoln's box to the stage. Mudd was later arrested, tried and sentenced to life in prison for supposedly belonging to the conspiracy to assassinate the president.

The question now becomes: was he set up, was he a scapegoat in one of the largest manhunts in American history, or was he truly a conspirator in Booth's plot? The evidence, I believe, points to the former two, rather than the latter. Much of the evidence gathered was seemingly quite circumstantial, and points, rather, to Booth, in essence, setting up Mudd.

We know that Booth's original plot had been to kidnap Lincoln, and his planned escape route was through Southern Maryland, a hotbed of southern sympathizers, of which Mudd was undoubtedly one. However, was he a spy, or a courier for the Confederacy? This is hard to prove, as evidence is scanty. No evidence has come forward to directly link him to Richmond, and the fact that he knew Samuel Cox, a known Confederate spy in Charles County isn't enough to convict, as who didn't know Mr. Cox, a very well known and wealthy man in the area?

We also know that Booth met Dr. Mudd in November, 1864, and that he stayed with the Mudd's for a night and bought a horse from one of Mudd's neighbors, which was later used by Lewis Powell (aka Lewis Payne/Paine) to escape from Seward's home after his attempt to murder the Secratary of State. There was also another meeting of the two in Washington a month later, which seems to be accidental, a passing meeting between the two. The two did exchange words, but what those words were isn't known, and could very well be just concerning a land deal Booth was supposedly trying to make with Mudd. But was Booth in Charles County to specifically meet with Mudd, or was he there to just scout out the area and develop assets, something any good agent would do?

There is also the fact that on the night Booth stopped, he wore a disguise, and did not identify himself to Mudd. When Herold and Booth stopped, Herold introduced himself as Tyson and Booth as Tyler. If Mudd was a member of any conspiracy, why hide his identity? Why not say that it was him? Mudd would surely have helped in a heartbeat, to help his fellow conspirator, rather than fulfill the Hippocratic oath he was bound to uphold? If Mudd was in on the whole kidnapping plot, which devolved to murder, then what is the need to disguise himself? There isn't any.

Thirdly, there is the fact that Booth did not tell the authorities himself and that he hid evidence from them. At the time that Booth left, Mudd apparently wanted to hurry back to Bryantown and tell the authorities that he had a suspicion that Booth had just stayed at his house and had just left. He wife, however, begged him not to, because she was afraid that they might return and clean up a loose end. Instead, he told his cousin George the next day, and George, a Unionist (one of a few true Unionists in Charles County), told the detectives, who came to talk to Mudd on Tuesday. On Friday, he turned over the boot, and a couple of days later was arrested as a conspirator. People say that he forgot to get rid of evidence, but in reality, he could have just been holding onto a boot for a patient to come and pick up. As a doctor, he had to cut off the boot, and, cut in the right place, a boot can easily be repaired. So might he, at the time, have thought the man would possibly take his boot, or if he left it, come back to get it, so that he could repair it?

Many pieces of evidence point to Mudd's innocence. The evidence that incriminated Mudd is all circumstantial. Was he a part of a plot to kidnap Lincoln? It is highly doubtful. Was he southern sympathizer? Most likely, as he owned slaves and some of his relatives went to fight for the Confederacy. So was he innocent or guilty? I hold to his being completely innocent.

There is much out there to read on this subject. Here are some titles that one can read, which give both sides of the story.

-American Brutus by Michael Kauffman. This book is excellent, a product of many years of research. Comes from the point of view that Mudd was innocent for the most part.
-Blood on the Moon by Ed Steers. This book is also good. It comes from the point of view that Mudd was guilty and member of the conspiracy.
-Manhunt by James Swanson. A narrative of the 12 day chase of Booth and all that happened in between. A fast, interesting read, but not quite on par with the first two.

Peruse these and decide for yourself. You can also visit the Mudd House, which is a privately owned museum in Charles county. Read and decide. Innocent......or guilty?