Words from Dr. Richard Mudd

[RJNorton]

Here are the words of Dr. Richard Mudd when he was 98 years old. Thanks to the folks on the forum who posted that a cassette could be made into a .mp3 file I was able to contact someone who transferred Richard Mudd's words to a CD. I must thank a lady named Stacy Nelson who sent me the cassette back in 1999. The statement goes for about 30 minutes and lots of names are mentioned.

I thought one of the more interesting things Richard Mudd had to say regarded the supplies George Atzerodt said were sent by Booth to Dr. Mudd's. Richard Mudd says that these supplies actually went to Dr. George Mudd's home, not Samuel Mudd's. George Mudd was a cousin of Samuel Mudd.

The statement of Richard Mudd is here.

[LincolnMan]

Roger- great work. I listened to about two minutes of the recording. The sound is crystal clear. I look forward to listening to the entire thing- which I see is a little over 30 minutes.

[L Verge]

(06-22-2014 04:50 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Here are the words of Dr. Richard Mudd when he was 98 years old. Thanks to the folks on the forum who posted that a cassette could be made into a .mp3 file I was able to contact someone who transferred Richard Mudd's words to a CD. I must thank a lady named Stacy Nelson who sent me the cassette back in 1999. The statement goes for about 30 minutes and lots of names are mentioned.

I thought one of the more interesting things Richard Mudd had to say regarded the supplies George Atzerodt said were sent by Booth to Dr. Mudd's. Richard Mudd says that these supplies actually went to Dr. George Mudd's home, not Samuel Mudd's. George Mudd was a cousin of Samuel Mudd.

The statement of Richard Mudd is here.

And Dr. George Mudd was one of the very few Union sympathizers in Southern Maryland. The Mudds also said that Booth asked for directions to Rev. Lemuel Wilmer, another strong Union supporter - to the point where he was "ordained" by the War Department to serve as a chaplain to Union forces. Go figure...

[Wild Bill]

Why the Mudd family cannot admit that Dr Sam was a Confederate sympathizer and possible agent beats me, But Mike Kauffman agreed with them in American Brutus (New York Random House, 2004), 230-31, 243-45, 293-94. Here is some of the relevant material: The account that makes the most sense to me is Edward Steers, Jr., His Name is still Mud" (Gettysburg: Thomas, 1997), perhaps the best thing written on the Mudd case. See also, Dr. Mudd's Sense of Timing: The Trip to Bryantown," Dillon (ed.), The Lincoln Assassination: From the Pages of the Surratt Courier, VIII, 33-36. But not all are convinced. See John E. McHale, "A Letter in Response," ibid., VIII, 37-38; and Clark Larsen, "Response to Response in re Mudd," ibid., VIII, 39-42. See also, William A. Tidwell, "April 15, 1865," Surratt Courier, 22 (April-May-June 1997), 6-10, 5-10, 4-9; Kauffman, “Booth's Escape Route: Lincoln's Assassin on the Run,” Blue & Gray Magazine (June 1990), 17-18.
Advocates of Dr. Mudd's innocence often maintain that he was shown a picture of Edwin Booth, not John Wilkes, hence the denial he had seen that man at his house. This argument is belittled by critics who point out that the correct picture was shown the hapless doctor. We have taken the coward's way out and allowed Lt. Dana to get his Booths mixed up, verbally. But Mudd knew which Booth was at question, picture or not.
See the exchange between John E. McHale (on Mudd's behalf) and James O. Hall and Edward Steers, Jr., (against Mudd), which hit hard against the doctor's strict parsing of his answers to the Federal detectives' questions: Dillon (ed.), The Lincoln Assassination: From the Pages of the Surratt Courier, VIII, 1-30. See also, Steers, "The Wrong Picture," ibid., VIII, 31-32, and Steers, Blood on the Moon, xiii. A nice summary of he whole argument is Andrew Ferguson, “Last Battle of the Civil War [The Guilt or Innocence of Dr. Mudd],” Weekly Standard, 8 (December 30, 2002), [1-13].

[L Verge]

I wish that I had not listened to the tape because it made me sad. My first introduction to Dr. Richard was when I was in my teens and my mother received a phone call from him wanting to hear our story of David Herold spending the night with her grandparents (the Huntts) in T.B. (April 13, 1865). My mother recounted the story, only to have Dr. Richard inform her, "That's ridiculous!" and then hang up on her.

It was another thirty years before I had the opportunity to meet Dr. Mudd at the Surratt House. I found him pleasant - but totally unwavering at that point on any question but that his grandfather was innocent. Frankly, if my ancestor, Eli Huntt, had been arrested and put through what the Mudds went through, I suspect I would be very defensive also. On the other hand, when I did read Atzerodt's statement about Huntt in T.B. being prepared to provide horses for the abduction, I was intrigued and rather proud to know that I had Confederates in the attic who supported their cause.

That said, I enjoyed Dr. Mudd's several visits, and he and I never were at sword's points. He also generously shared materials with us at Surratt House. This tape is troubling to me only because it reflects how the years had taken a toll on this man. There are a number of things I could quibble with, but won't. I would finally say that you have to respect Dr. Mudd for his devotion to the cause - just as I respect Dr. Samuel A. Mudd for (IMO) his support of the Confederate cause.

Now, if you have not already read this book, go find His Name Is Still Mudd by Edward Steers and also go the fantastic website that Bob Summers has on the entire Mudd story.

---

(06-22-2014 11:17 AM)Wild Bill Wrote:  Why the Mudd family cannot admit that Dr Sam was a Confederate sympathizer and possible agent beats me, But Mike Kauffman agreed with them in American Brutus (New York Random House, 2004), 230-31, 243-45, 293-94. Here is some of the relevant material: The account that makes the most sense to me is Edward Steers, Jr., His Name is still Mud" (Gettysburg: Thomas, 1997), perhaps the best thing written on the Mudd case. See also, Dr. Mudd's Sense of Timing: The Trip to Bryantown," Dillon (ed.), The Lincoln Assassination: From the Pages of the Surratt Courier, VIII, 33-36. But not all are convinced. See John E. McHale, "A Letter in Response," ibid., VIII, 37-38; and Clark Larsen, "Response to Response in re Mudd," ibid., VIII, 39-42. See also, William A. Tidwell, "April 15, 1865," Surratt Courier, 22 (April-May-June 1997), 6-10, 5-10, 4-9; Kauffman, “Booth's Escape Route: Lincoln's Assassin on the Run,” Blue & Gray Magazine (June 1990), 17-18.
Advocates of Dr. Mudd's innocence often maintain that he was shown a picture of Edwin Booth, not John Wilkes, hence the denial he had seen that man at his house. This argument is belittled by critics who point out that the correct picture was shown the hapless doctor. We have taken the coward's way out and allowed Lt. Dana to get his Booths mixed up, verbally. But Mudd knew which Booth was at question, picture or not.
See the exchange between John E. McHale (on Mudd's behalf) and James O. Hall and Edward Steers, Jr., (against Mudd), which hit hard against the doctor's strict parsing of his answers to the Federal detectives' questions: Dillon (ed.), The Lincoln Assassination: From the Pages of the Surratt Courier, VIII, 1-30. See also, Steers, "The Wrong Picture," ibid., VIII, 31-32, and Steers, Blood on the Moon, xiii. A nice summary of he whole argument is Andrew Ferguson, “Last Battle of the Civil War [The Guilt or Innocence of Dr. Mudd],” Weekly Standard, 8 (December 30, 2002), [1-13].

I was typing my post while you were posting this one, Bill. I heartily agree that everyone should be reading the sources you have mentioned above. And may I just say that your Master's in Library Sciences sure serves all of us well because you can locate and cite relevant sources of information faster than any person I know! Add to that your command of history (courtesy of another Master's and a PhD -- and lots of reading and study) and you are a formidable encyclopedia.

[Wild Bill]

I cheated. It is a chapter note from Last Confed Heroes with some modifications.

[L Verge]

I hope Bob Summers will chime in on a question I have related to Dr. Richard's interview: The Doctor mentions visiting the home of his great-grandfather, Henry Lowe Mudd, as a child. That home was Oak Hill, and our Booth Tour narrators point out its location when we go past. However, it is my understanding that Oak Hill burned - I thought in the late-1800s - and took with it one of the largest private libraries in the area. Bob, do you know if that is correct and the year that it burned? For some reason, I didn't think it was still standing when Dr. Richard was a child.

Mention is made of a Dr. Stone that Booth could have been treated by. I believe that is referring to Dr. Michael Stone of Aquasco (whose home still exists). I have long tried to make a connection between Stone and Booth because Stone was very likely on the Doctor's Line that served the Confederacy. However, his home is miles further down the road past Horsehead Tavern and the road that we old-timers believe that Booth and Herold took to get to Mudd's.

As for the "new" road that they could have taken, there was one somewhat close to what we now call Maryland Route 5 that leads into Waldorf. It took a somewhat circuitous route out of T.B., however, and entered Charles County from Prince George's County right onto the Huntt family plantation (where great-grandpappy Eli Huntt was born in 1837). At that time (1865), the plantation was on the banks of the Mattawoman Creek and owned by my great-great-grandfather, Joseph Riley Huntt, who inherited it when he married Julia Ann Tippett. If you trace the property back far enough, you find that it was originally part of a Mudd farm in the late-1700s. The graveyard (est. 1858) for the Huntts still remains on what was the long plantation road to the house. The farm was literally sliced in half in the 1950s with the dual-lane Route 5 and is now a conglomeration of commercialization.

The next question mark may involve Eva's help: Dr. Mudd mentioned Waldorf. It was originally named Beantown and was a little farther down the road than what is now Waldorf. The commercial area that we know as "old" Waldorf received that name in 1880, when the railroad went through. The name was supposedly changed to honor William Waldorf Astor, a great-grandson of John Jacob Astor, who was born in Walldorf, Palatinate, Germany. I really don't mean to sound crass here, but what was/is the big deal with William Waldorf Astor? Or his namesake town?

[RJNorton]

In addition to Laurie's questions I would like to throw one out there also. In his "lost statement" George Atzerodt said, "I am certain Dr. Mudd knew all about it, as Booth sent (as he told me) liquors & provisions for the trip with the President to Richmond, about two weeks before the murder to Dr. Mudd's."

Ever since I read that many years ago I just automatically assumed Booth told Atzerodt the provisons were sent to Dr. Samuel Mudd's. Dr. Richard Mudd claims that it was actually Dr. George Mudd who was holding the provisions. Atzerodt does not specify which Mudd it was. Is this possible? When Booth told Atzerodt that provisions were sent to Dr. Mudd's could he actually have been referring to Dr. George Mudd? Any chance Richard Mudd might be right?

[bob_summers]

(06-22-2014 01:25 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I hope Bob Summers will chime in on a question I have related to Dr. Richard's interview: The Doctor mentions visited the home of his great-grandfather, Henry Lowe Mudd, as a child. That home was Oak Hill, and our Booth Tour narrators point out its location when we go past. However, it is my understanding that Oak Hill burned - I thought in the late-1800s - and took with it one of the largest private libraries in the area. Bob, do you know if that is correct and the year that it burned? For some reason, I didn't think it was still standing when Dr. Richard was a child.

Mention is made of a Dr. Stone that Booth could have been treated by. I believe that is referring to Dr. Michael Stone of Aquasco (whose home still exists). I have long tried to make a connection between Stone and Booth because Stone was very likely on the Doctor's Line that served the Confederacy. However, his home is miles further down the road past Horsehead Tavern and the road that we old-timers believe that Booth and Herold took to get to Mudd's.

As for the "new" road that they could have taken, there was one somewhat close to what we now call Maryland Route 5 that leads into Waldorf. It took a somewhat circuitous route out of T.B., however, and entered Charles County from Prince George's County right onto the Huntt family plantation (where grand-grandpappy Eli Huntt was born in 1837). At that time (1865), the plantation was on the banks of the Mattawoman Creek and owned by my great-great-grandfather, Joseph Riley Huntt, who inherited it when he married Julia Ann Tippett. If you trace the property back far enough, you find that it was originally part of a Mudd farm in the late-1700s. The graveyard (est. 1858) for the Huntts still remains on what was the long plantation road to the house. The farm was literally sliced in half in the 1950s with the dual-lane Route 5 and is now a conglomeration of commercialization.

The next question mark may involve Eva's help: Dr. Mudd mentioned Waldorf. It was originally named Beantown and was a little farther down the road than what is now Waldorf. The commercial area that we know as "old" Waldorf received that name in 1880, when the railroad went through. The name was supposedly changed to honor William Waldorf Astor, a great-grandson of John Jacob Astor, who was born in Walldorf, Palatinate, Germany. I really don't mean to sound crass here, but what was/is the big deal with William Waldorf Astor? Or his namesake town?

Laurie: You are correct. In Richard Mudd’s genealogy The Mudd Family of the United States, he says:

“The home of Henry Lowe Mudd was .8 miles South East of his son Samuel A. Mudd’s home. It was a fine home, larger than Dr. Samuel A. Mudd’s home, and contained a chapel in which Mass was said at intervals until the beginning of the Civil War. About the year 1881 this fine home with its library burned and everything was lost. “

One observation about the tape. Dr. Richard Mudd characterizes George Mudd as posing as a Unionist, citing his ownership of slaves. Everything I have read about Dr. George Mudd indicates that he was a true Unionist, not just posing as one. I also haven’t found any evidence that he was a slave owner.

I think the confusion results from there being two George Mudds living in the Bryantown area at the time. According to the 1860 Federal Census, Dr. George Mudd, whose wife died in 1858, lived with his 5-year-old son DeSales Mudd. The census doesn’t tell us exactly where he lived, but we know from various other accounts that Dr. George Mudd lived and worked right in the town of Bryantown.

The Federal census shows that the other George Mudd is part of a large 13-member family. It seems reasonable to assume that such a large family lived on a farm, which needed slaves to operate.

The 1860 Federal Slave Census for the Bryantown area shows only one George Mudd as a slave-owner (11 slaves). It seems more likely to me that the farmer, not the doctor, was the slave-owner.

[Wild Bill]

I thought pretty the much the same as Roger Norton about the trunk of supplies delivered to "Mudd" from Booth.

I also have a great deal of trouble with Dr Richard Mudd's American political science. I always thought the three branches were the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. I do not recall that the military was a separate branch of government, but rather part of the executive branch (under the Secretary of War at that time, Secretary of Defense, Department of the Army now). What we have here is vague family reminiscences when exactitude and precision is called for. Once again I refer everyone to Ed Steers, His Name is Still Mudd. There is our precision.

[bob_summers]

(06-22-2014 01:48 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  In addition to Laurie's questions I would like to throw one out there also. In his "lost statement" George Atzerodt said, "I am certain Dr. Mudd knew all about it, as Booth sent (as he told me) liquors & provisions for the trip with the President to Richmond, about two weeks before the murder to Dr. Mudd's."

Ever since I read that many years ago I just automatically assumed Booth told Atzerodt the provisons were sent to Dr. Samuel Mudd's. Dr. Richard Mudd claims that it was actually Dr. George Mudd who was holding the provisions. Atzerodt does not specify which Mudd it was. Is this possible? When Booth told Atzerodt that provisions were sent to Dr. Mudd's could he actually have been referring to Dr. George Mudd? Any chance Richard Mudd might be right?

Roger: I also never heard of this before. I don’t know of anything to support it.

In all of this we have to remember that Atzerodt had no personal knowledge of Dr. Mudd or of anything that may have taken place between Booth and Mudd. We don’t know if Booth actually told Atzerodt anything about Dr. Mudd, and if he did, if what he told Atzerodt was actually true. All we really know for a fact is that Booth and Herold left Dr. Mudd’s without doggie bags. The first thing they asked Oswald Swan for shortly after leaving Dr. Mudd’s was for liquor and food.

[bob_summers]

(06-16-2014 04:19 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(06-15-2014 12:46 PM)LincolnMan Wrote:  Dr. Richard D. Mudd, grandson of Dr. Samuel A. Mudd has an article on the front page: Dr. Samuel A. Mudd- Not Guilty.

Back in 1999 a young lady interviewed Dr. Richard Mudd. She kindly sent me a cassette tape of that interview. I was truly amazed that the gentleman, at age 98, was incredibly articulate in his arguments.

Roger: I too am amazed at Dr. Richard Mudd’s mental clarity at 98, although you can tell from the tape that he sometimes struggled. I shared the link to the tape interview with Dr. Richard Mudd’s son Tom. He emailed me back, and I don’t think he would mind if I shared his comments with everyone. He wrote:

“Thanks, Bob. I remember Stacy Nelson doing the interview. At that time in his life, my father was still quite lucid, but his shortness of breath made it difficult for him to speak for long periods without some agony. Dad's memory was quite good for his age and condition, but he did have some trouble recalling facts with clarity as he spoke on. I was amazed at the quality of his mind at the very end of his life when his body gave out.”

[L Verge]

Thank you, Bob, for the information about the second George Mudd in the Bryantown area. I had never heard that, and my first instinct would be that maybe he (the slave owner) was who was entangled with Booth. However, that would make me wonder why Atzerodt specifically said "Dr." IMO, Atzerodt told the truth, however, I suspect that "food and provisions" was not what was being sent to Dr. Mudd. I suspect it was those darned pistols that we have discussed before and similar "goodies" that left in those doggie bags.

Also, it was not unusual in Maryland for one to be a slaveholder and still support the Union. I believe that I am correct in that John Bell of the Constitutional Union Party was second runner-up in the state in 1860. He represented those who wanted to maintain slavery, but also the Union. The Huntts claimed to be of that ilk.

[wpbinzel]

Due to family matters, I am a bit late to this thread, but wanted to add my thanks as well to Roger for his efforts to have the cassette tape converted and for sharing it, which has generated some interesting comments. Wonderful stuff. The willingness to share materials, research and perspectives is what makes this such a great “community.”

In listening to Dr. Richard Mudd, it suggests that history that could have been dramatically different. If Dr. Samuel A. Mudd had simply led Union troops from Bryantown back to his farm, he could have gone down in history as the hero responsible for the capture of Lincoln’s assassin. However, Mudd did not betray Booth because he could not. If Mudd had betrayed Booth, Booth most certainly would have told his captors of his extensive relationship with Mudd and provided the names of witnesses who had seen them together. If Mudd had placed a noose around Booth’s neck, Booth would surely have returned the favor.

[RobertLC]

(06-15-2014 12:46 PM)LincolnMan Wrote:  Years ago someone sent me a newspaper from one of my former hometowns- Monterey, Tennessee. The paper is the Standing Stone Press (Winter 1984. Dr. Richard D. Mudd, grandson of Dr. Samuel A. Mudd has an article on the front page: Dr. Samuel A. Mudd- Not Guilty.

I just started reading the article and find it fascinating. Here is an excerpt where Dr. Richard Mudd refers to himself:

"It is difficult for me to understand why I became willing to carry on a crusade to clear my grandfather's name. I have never been able to escape the story. It was born in me and will undoubtedly continue to color my life. On January 24th, 1901, I was born on the very street that John Wilkes Booth rode his horse on that foggy misty night, 35 years, 9 months, and 10 days previously, in fact Good Friday, April 14, 1865. Good Hope Road, known as Harrison Street in 1901, was a muddy, rutted carriage lane..."

Mudd goes on to state much more of his reflections on what it was like for him because of his name, the troubles his father had for the same reason, and why he came to conclude that his grandfather was not guilty. Great stuff!

Is the article available for others to see? It sounds really interesting and worth reading.

Thanks.

Robert