Food for Thought

[mike86002000]

(08-07-2019 05:46 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Thanks, Mike. Personally I have never heard of a possible New York Times interview; I believe Mudd gave at least one interview after his release in 1869, but I've never read of a possible interview while he was imprisoned.

Dr. Mudd denied even recognizing Booth at various times, and said he never made the statement to Dutton, after he got to prison.
Much later, while running for elected office with one of Cox's sons he is supposed to have admitted to recognizing Booth. There are penciled notes in Cox's copy of the Jones book about it. I think I saw pictures of them, sometime ago. They were badly faded, and hard to read. There was no way to tell who wrote them, or when. Dr. Mudd was desperately trying to save himself, for the sake of his family.
It's often said that he escaped execution by only one vote. it's equally true that he was denied exoneration, and freedom, by one vote.
A commander of the troops pursuing Booth, said Dr. Mudd's lips turned blue, and he appeared to be agitated, when he lied. He wasn't very good at it, not being very experienced, or comfortable with it, to his credit, I think. I recall seeing pictures of him before and after his arrest, trial, and imprisonment. I don't think his nose grew a bit! Smurfs weren't described as a species 'till a hundred years later.
Mr. Prindle, unkindly characterizes Dr. Mudd as a "liar". That's like dismissing George Washington as a "slave owner". I've read the petitions written by guards and fellow prisoners at Dry Tortugas, calling for his release. There are two in the national archives. Some of those folks couldn't even write their name. They signed with an "X", and had someone write in their name, wanting to do what they could for Dr. Mudd.
As I have said above, Mr. Prindle says the "trial" was illegal, and the pardons were granted to head off an appeal to the supreme court. He does so in strong terms.
Mike