Mudd Descendants visit Fort Jefferson NP

[BettyO]

In honor of the 150th anniversary, Mudd descendants visited Fort Jefferson


http://miami.cbslocal.com/2015/07/25/mud...risonment/

[John Fazio]

(07-25-2015 03:09 PM)BettyO Wrote:  In honor of the 150th anniversary, Mudd descendants visited Fort Jefferson


http://miami.cbslocal.com/2015/07/25/mud...risonment/

Betty:

Thanks. Very interesting. What is your opinion as to his guilt or innocence? Steers believes he was guilty. I believe Kauffman believes he was innocent.

John

[BettyO]

Hey, John !

I believe what Steers believed. Mudd ( like all the guys ) was more involved with the Confederate underground than was led to be believed. Sure, he knew JWB , knew him well, but when Booth and Herold came on that Saturday morning, he didn't know JWB had shot Lincoln.

[John Fazio]

(07-25-2015 03:59 PM)BettyO Wrote:  Hey, John !

I believe what Steers believed. Mudd ( like all the guys ) was more involved with the Confederate underground than was led to be believed. Sure, he knew JWB , knew him well, but when Booth and Herold came on that Saturday morning, he didn't know JWB had shot Lincoln.

Betty:

That may be true, but if it is true, one has to discount or ignore the statements of Brigadier General Levi Axtell Dodd and Assistant Paymaster William F. Keeler (both of whom were aboard the Florida, which took the prisoners to Ft. Jefferson) that Dr. Mudd had admitted that he had recognized Booth immediately and that he knew he had murdered Lincoln. One also has to ignore Keeler's letter to his Congressman in which he said "In conversation with myself, & I think with others on our passage down he (Dr. Mudd) admitted what I believe the prosecution failed to prove at his trial ---viz---that he knew who Booth was when he set his leg & what crime he was guilty (of)." Add to these statements the testimony of Daniel J. Thomas, who said that Dr. Mudd had said to him, among other inflammatory things, that "the President, Cabinet and other Union men in the State of Maryland would be killed in six or seen weeks", and we have a fairly strong case that Dr. Mudd knew what was coming and who was likely to be the agent to accomplish at least part of it.

Further, if we accept the theory that Dr. Mudd was ignorant of the crime, we have to ask ourselves: What did Dr. Mudd suppose had happened to Booth and Herold, the famous actor and dandy whom he knew quite well, to cause them to show up on his doorstep at 4:00 am in a bedraggled state, in terrible condition, and, in Booth's case, with a broken leg? Common sense dictates that he must have realized that only some very extraordinary circumstance would put them there at that time and in that condition. That he does not appear to have inquired or made an issue of it suggests that he already knew or at least had a very good idea of what brought them there at that time. In other words, if we accept as fact Dr. Mudd's recognition of one of his callers as Booth (and the case for it is clear and convincing), then we are almost compelled to accept his knowledge of Booth's crime.

Further, if we accept the theory of ignorance, then we must suppose that all the help Booth and Herold received from the mail line operatives (Dr. Mudd, Cox, Jones, Hughes, Harbin, Baden, Bryant, Quesenberry, et al.) was spontaneous rather that prearranged. Does that seem likely? I think not,

Further, if we accept the theory of ignorance, we are almost forced to conclude that Dr. Mudd really and truly believed that Booth's conspiracy had kidnapping the President as its goal, rather than assassination, which, in my opinion, is absurd.

John

[L Verge]

(07-26-2015 07:20 AM)John Fazio Wrote:  

(07-25-2015 03:59 PM)BettyO Wrote:  Hey, John !

I believe what Steers believed. Mudd ( like all the guys ) was more involved with the Confederate underground than was led to be believed. Sure, he knew JWB , knew him well, but when Booth and Herold came on that Saturday morning, he didn't know JWB had shot Lincoln.

Betty:

That may be true, but if it is true, one has to discount or ignore the statements of Brigadier General Levi Axtell Dodd and Assistant Paymaster William F. Keeler (both of whom were aboard the Florida, which took the prisoners to Ft. Jefferson) that Dr. Mudd had admitted that he had recognized Booth immediately and that he knew he had murdered Lincoln. One also has to ignore Keeler's letter to his Congressman in which he said "In conversation with myself, & I think with others on our passage down he (Dr. Mudd) admitted what I believe the prosecution failed to prove at his trial ---viz---that he knew who Booth was when he set his leg & what crime he was guilty (of)." Add to these statements the testimony of Daniel J. Thomas, who said that Dr. Mudd had said to him, among other inflammatory things, that "the President, Cabinet and other Union men in the State of Maryland would be killed in six or seen weeks", and we have a fairly strong case that Dr. Mudd knew what was coming and who was likely to be the agent to accomplish at least part of it.

Further, if we accept the theory that Dr. Mudd was ignorant of the crime, we have to ask ourselves: What did Dr. Mudd suppose had happened to Booth and Herold, the famous actor and dandy whom he knew quite well, to cause them to show up on his doorstep at 4:00 am in a bedraggled state, in terrible condition, and, in Booth's case, with a broken leg? Common sense dictates that he must have realized that only some very extraordinary circumstance would put them there at that time and in that condition. That he does not appear to have inquired or made an issue of it suggests that he already knew or at least had a very good idea of what brought them there at that time. In other words, if we accept as fact Dr. Mudd's recognition of one of his callers as Booth (and the case for it is clear and convincing), then we are almost compelled to accept his knowledge of Booth's crime.

Further, if we accept the theory of ignorance, then we must suppose that all the help Booth and Herold received from the mail line operatives (Dr. Mudd, Cox, Jones, Hughes, Harbin, Baden, Bryant, Quesenberry, et al.) was spontaneous rather that prearranged. Does that seem likely? I think not,

Further, if we accept the theory of ignorance, we are almost forced to conclude that Dr. Mudd really and truly believed that Booth's conspiracy had kidnapping the President as its goal, rather than assassination, which, in my opinion, is absurd.

John

I'm going to ignore your last sentence, John, because right now I'm too worn out to have another battle on this forum.

However, as to your views on Dr. Mudd knowing ahead of time that Booth was up to something, they reinforce my theory that Herold was in Southern Maryland on April 13 (and maybe the 12th) to contact the underground to be ready for something big. Herold may not have explicitly said "assassination," but I bet Dr. Mudd found that out as soon as the fugitives arrived at his doorstep - just like Lloyd found out in Surrattsville. Since Mudd had been in with Booth since the beginning, he would certainly be one who would be glad to hear that Lincoln was dead!

Follow the timeline: Lee surrenders on the 9th, and celebrations begin in D.C. Those upset Booth tremendously. Booth snaps when he hears Lincoln's speech on the 11th, wheels begin to race on the 12th and 13th, and the assassination happens on the 14th. Booth and Herold show up at Mudd's early on April 15th. Mudd first asks his wife to go to the door in her nightclothes (which I wouldn't do, even today) although he later claims they were afraid of guerrilla Boyle in the neighborhood. So send the wife to the door? I think not - grab your pistol or shotgun to greet whomever is at the door.

From there, the leg is set, Booth is allowed to remain in the house for over twelve hours, and Mudd tries to get his father's buggy for easy transport. Would he do that for some stranger? Then he is too chicken to go to the authorities and sends his Union supporting first cousin to report the strangers who were now on the run.

Bill Richter drives me crazy when he quotes one of his professors to me: "If it didn't happen that way, it should have." In the case of Dr. Mudd, however, I think it applies to my theory.

[Wild Bill]

In the last paragraph of his book, Decapitating the Union, Fazio admits to taking the reader on a “long, sometimes tedious, sometimes contentious, sometimes puzzling” journey. He thanks us for our perseverance in making the trip. “More importantly, I hope that this book has brought us closer to that will o’ the wisp known as truth,” Fazio says.
Fazio is determined to clear up many of the existing conundrums surrounding the Lincoln assassination even today, those “will o’ the wisp[s]” that lead to “truth.” He uses three “tools,” as he calls them, to find “truth”: Evidence (eyewitness, material and circumstantial), Reason, and an understanding of Human Nature to clear up errors, differences of opinion, and unknowns to prove conspiracy. It is a natural process when one considers his life-long law experience, but he often offers up speculation that he considers enlightened that informed readers might see otherwise.
I am willing to go along with most of what he says about Dr. Mudd, viz., “[if] we accept the theory that Dr. Mudd was ignorant of the crime, we have to ask ourselves: What did Dr. Mudd suppose had happened to Booth and Herold, the famous actor and dandy whom he knew quite well, to cause them to show up on his doorstep at 4:00 am in a bedraggled state, in terrible condition, and, in Booth's case, with a broken leg? Common sense dictates that he must have realized that only some very extraordinary circumstance would put them there at that time and in that condition. That he does not appear to have inquired or made an issue of it suggests that he already knew or at least had a very good idea of what brought them there at that time. In other words, if we accept as fact Dr. Mudd's recognition of one of his callers as Booth (and the case for it is clear and convincing), then we are almost compelled to accept his knowledge of Booth's crime.” Almost compelled, but not quite, is the implication here. This leaves open a lot of room for Mudd’s train of thought, if he had any beyond helping a hurt patient.
Fazio goes on: “[if] we accept the theory of ignorance, then we must suppose that all the help Booth and Herold received from the mail line operatives (Dr. Mudd, Cox, Jones, Hughes, Harbin, Baden, Bryant, Quesenberry, et al.) was spontaneous rather that prearranged. Does that seem likely? I think not[.]” I believe that some knew what Booth was doing (Harbin, Baden), some might have suspected it (Cox, Hughes, Struart), and others were ignorant (Quesenberry, Bryant). But no one was too surprised to find an unannounced stranger in need of assistance at their door night or day if they were part of the “Secret Line.” After all, the Confederate spy and agent Stringfellow preceded Booth all the way into Virginia by approximately the same route.
Finally, Fazio asserts: “[if ] we accept the theory of ignorance, we are almost forced to conclude that Dr. Mudd really and truly believed that Booth's conspiracy had kidnapping the President as its goal, rather than assassination, which, in my opinion, is absurd.” I do not know that we are forced to “almost forced to conclude” that it was “absurd” that Booth et al. never thought of or tried to abduct President Lincoln, at least “in my opinion,” but then I admittedly lack Fazio’s superior education knowledge as an attorney/historian, having spent 30 years wrangling horse and mules out here in fly-over country on the Mexican border.
Fazio correctly maintains overall that the whole truth about the Lincoln assassination will never be known because it is unknowable. We are fated to see but the crumbs from the table, trimmings, off-scourings, outlines, translucencies, and other leavings, as we humans cannot comprehend the whole truth about those chaotic hours, days, even months that surround April 1865.
But as a truly wise man once observed, “We learn from history how little we learn from history.

[RJNorton]

On this page Professor P.S. Ruckman, Jr. writes:

"In 1901, Mudd's wife, Frances, also indicated to a Lincoln historian that her husband was well aware that Booth was his visitor and the fact that Booth had shot and killed Lincoln."

Surely the "Lincoln historian" would be Osborn Oldroyd. Does anyone know anything about this? Is Professor Ruckman right?

[John Fazio]

(07-26-2015 11:18 AM)L Verge Wrote:  

(07-26-2015 07:20 AM)John Fazio Wrote:  

(07-25-2015 03:59 PM)BettyO Wrote:  Hey, John !

I believe what Steers believed. Mudd ( like all the guys ) was more involved with the Confederate underground than was led to be believed. Sure, he knew JWB , knew him well, but when Booth and Herold came on that Saturday morning, he didn't know JWB had shot Lincoln.

Betty:

That may be true, but if it is true, one has to discount or ignore the statements of Brigadier General Levi Axtell Dodd and Assistant Paymaster William F. Keeler (both of whom were aboard the Florida, which took the prisoners to Ft. Jefferson) that Dr. Mudd had admitted that he had recognized Booth immediately and that he knew he had murdered Lincoln. One also has to ignore Keeler's letter to his Congressman in which he said "In conversation with myself, & I think with others on our passage down he (Dr. Mudd) admitted what I believe the prosecution failed to prove at his trial ---viz---that he knew who Booth was when he set his leg & what crime he was guilty (of)." Add to these statements the testimony of Daniel J. Thomas, who said that Dr. Mudd had said to him, among other inflammatory things, that "the President, Cabinet and other Union men in the State of Maryland would be killed in six or seen weeks", and we have a fairly strong case that Dr. Mudd knew what was coming and who was likely to be the agent to accomplish at least part of it.

Further, if we accept the theory that Dr. Mudd was ignorant of the crime, we have to ask ourselves: What did Dr. Mudd suppose had happened to Booth and Herold, the famous actor and dandy whom he knew quite well, to cause them to show up on his doorstep at 4:00 am in a bedraggled state, in terrible condition, and, in Booth's case, with a broken leg? Common sense dictates that he must have realized that only some very extraordinary circumstance would put them there at that time and in that condition. That he does not appear to have inquired or made an issue of it suggests that he already knew or at least had a very good idea of what brought them there at that time. In other words, if we accept as fact Dr. Mudd's recognition of one of his callers as Booth (and the case for it is clear and convincing), then we are almost compelled to accept his knowledge of Booth's crime.

Further, if we accept the theory of ignorance, then we must suppose that all the help Booth and Herold received from the mail line operatives (Dr. Mudd, Cox, Jones, Hughes, Harbin, Baden, Bryant, Quesenberry, et al.) was spontaneous rather that prearranged. Does that seem likely? I think not,

Further, if we accept the theory of ignorance, we are almost forced to conclude that Dr. Mudd really and truly believed that Booth's conspiracy had kidnapping the President as its goal, rather than assassination, which, in my opinion, is absurd.

John

I'm going to ignore your last sentence, John, because right now I'm too worn out to have another battle on this forum.

However, as to your views on Dr. Mudd knowing ahead of time that Booth was up to something, they reinforce my theory that Herold was in Southern Maryland on April 13 (and maybe the 12th) to contact the underground to be ready for something big. Herold may not have explicitly said "assassination," but I bet Dr. Mudd found that out as soon as the fugitives arrived at his doorstep - just like Lloyd found out in Surrattsville. Since Mudd had been in with Booth since the beginning, he would certainly be one who would be glad to hear that Lincoln was dead!

Follow the timeline: Lee surrenders on the 9th, and celebrations begin in D.C. Those upset Booth tremendously. Booth snaps when he hears Lincoln's speech on the 11th, wheels begin to race on the 12th and 13th, and the assassination happens on the 14th. Booth and Herold show up at Mudd's early on April 15th. Mudd first asks his wife to go to the door in her nightclothes (which I wouldn't do, even today) although he later claims they were afraid of guerrilla Boyle in the neighborhood. So send the wife to the door? I think not - grab your pistol or shotgun to greet whomever is at the door.

From there, the leg is set, Booth is allowed to remain in the house for over twelve hours, and Mudd tries to get his father's buggy for easy transport. Would he do that for some stranger? Then he is too chicken to go to the authorities and sends his Union supporting first cousin to report the strangers who were now on the run.

Bill Richter drives me crazy when he quotes one of his professors to me: "If it didn't happen that way, it should have." In the case of Dr. Mudd, however, I think it applies to my theory.

Laurie:

Yes, Herold was most definitely in southern Maryland on the 13th and maybe the 12th. Demond was unambiguous in his letters that he saw Booth and Herold on the Maryland side of the Navy Yard Bridge during the morning of the 14th. He held them for a while (because they refused to identify themselves), then released them when an officer sent by Dana said they were OK. He thought he had seen the last of them when they crossed into Washington and thus expressed surprise when he saw them return after 10 pm. The great likelihood, then, is that Booth too spent the night in Maryland, not only because of Demond's sighting, but also because we know that he did not spend the night in his room in the National. If Herold's purpose in being Maryland was to contact the underground, which is a reasonable assumption inasmuch as he did not live in Maryland, but in Washington, it was likely Booth's purpose as well. It squares with my contention and Bill's that at least some of the mail line members knew what was coming and therefore were ready to help the fugitives when the time came. Recall that Cox said that he had to pay $16,000 ($224,000 in today's money) "to prevent his neck from being cracked".

Your points about Dr. Mudd's asking his wife to answer the door at 4:00 am, his trying to obtain a buggy for a "stranger", and his sending of his cousin George to report the "strangers", are well taken.

Yes, Booth told Lloyd, because Lloyd was not part of the conspiracy and therefore knew nothing. But it was not necessary to tell Dr.Mudd, because, for all the reasons I gave (plus the statement of Captain George Dutton (on the Florida) and the annotations of Col. Sam Cox to Jone's 1893 book on Booth, which I previously did not mention), he already knew. This conclusion accords well with Roger's reference to Ruckman's writing quoting Dr. Mudd's wife Frances's statement that her husband knew who the caller was and what he had done. This reference, incidentally, is worth pursuing. I would like to see the original source. I have Oldroyd's history, but I do not recall him saying this.

John

---

(07-26-2015 11:19 AM)Wild Bill Wrote:  In the last paragraph of his book, Decapitating the Union, Fazio admits to taking the reader on a “long, sometimes tedious, sometimes contentious, sometimes puzzling” journey. He thanks us for our perseverance in making the trip. “More importantly, I hope that this book has brought us closer to that will o’ the wisp known as truth,” Fazio says.
Fazio is determined to clear up many of the existing conundrums surrounding the Lincoln assassination even today, those “will o’ the wisp[s]” that lead to “truth.” He uses three “tools,” as he calls them, to find “truth”: Evidence (eyewitness, material and circumstantial), Reason, and an understanding of Human Nature to clear up errors, differences of opinion, and unknowns to prove conspiracy. It is a natural process when one considers his life-long law experience, but he often offers up speculation that he considers enlightened that informed readers might see otherwise.
I am willing to go along with most of what he says about Dr. Mudd, viz., “[if] we accept the theory that Dr. Mudd was ignorant of the crime, we have to ask ourselves: What did Dr. Mudd suppose had happened to Booth and Herold, the famous actor and dandy whom he knew quite well, to cause them to show up on his doorstep at 4:00 am in a bedraggled state, in terrible condition, and, in Booth's case, with a broken leg? Common sense dictates that he must have realized that only some very extraordinary circumstance would put them there at that time and in that condition. That he does not appear to have inquired or made an issue of it suggests that he already knew or at least had a very good idea of what brought them there at that time. In other words, if we accept as fact Dr. Mudd's recognition of one of his callers as Booth (and the case for it is clear and convincing), then we are almost compelled to accept his knowledge of Booth's crime.” Almost compelled, but not quite, is the implication here. This leaves open a lot of room for Mudd’s train of thought, if he had any beyond helping a hurt patient.
Fazio goes on: “[if] we accept the theory of ignorance, then we must suppose that all the help Booth and Herold received from the mail line operatives (Dr. Mudd, Cox, Jones, Hughes, Harbin, Baden, Bryant, Quesenberry, et al.) was spontaneous rather that prearranged. Does that seem likely? I think not[.]” I believe that some knew what Booth was doing (Harbin, Baden), some might have suspected it (Cox, Hughes, Struart), and others were ignorant (Quesenberry, Bryant). But no one was too surprised to find an unannounced stranger in need of assistance at their door night or day if they were part of the “Secret Line.” After all, the Confederate spy and agent Stringfellow preceded Booth all the way into Virginia by approximately the same route.
Finally, Fazio asserts: “[if ] we accept the theory of ignorance, we are almost forced to conclude that Dr. Mudd really and truly believed that Booth's conspiracy had kidnapping the President as its goal, rather than assassination, which, in my opinion, is absurd.” I do not know that we are forced to “almost forced to conclude” that it was “absurd” that Booth et al. never thought of or tried to abduct President Lincoln, at least “in my opinion,” but then I admittedly lack Fazio’s superior education knowledge as an attorney/historian, having spent 30 years wrangling horse and mules out here in fly-over country on the Mexican border.
Fazio correctly maintains overall that the whole truth about the Lincoln assassination will never be known because it is unknowable. We are fated to see but the crumbs from the table, trimmings, off-scourings, outlines, translucencies, and other leavings, as we humans cannot comprehend the whole truth about those chaotic hours, days, even months that surround April 1865.
But as a truly wise man once observed, “We learn from history how little we learn from history.

Wild Bill:

I like that quote and will, I am sure, have occasion to use it.

I gather you still think Booth may have really intended to kidnap. Let me say that the evidence against its being bona fide is overwhelming. My book contains 12 and 1/2 pages of it in just one chapter. As originally written, it was twice that long, but I cut it because of the demands of publishers. Do you really believe Booth would show up on Davis's and Benjamin's doorstep with Lincoln in handcuffs and say "Look what I brought you Mr. President", even if he somehow managed the all but impossible feat of capturing Lincoln and conveying him across the bridge and into Richmond? And that Davis and Benjamin would welcome Booth with open arms and give him and his co-conspirators lots of money for their accomplishment and then see to their everlasting comfort here or abroad? What would they do with Lincoln in the face of Northern stonewalling? Pull out his fingernails? Chop off a limb at a time? Until the Federal government did something it had already been doing since January, namely exchanging Confederate POW's at the rate of 3,000/week? Unless you believe that Davis and Benjamin would not have been surprised, because they already knew about Booth and his conspiracy, which, of course, they absolutely, ipso facto, did. In that case, why didn't they stop him, knowing that a kidnapped Lincoln could do the Confederacy no good at all, as "even a child would know", in the words of Thomas Nelson Conrad? If they thought he was only going to kidnap, but not kill, but knew that kidnapping could do them no good, why did their agents continue to meet with him, counsel him, encourage him, finance him and help him?

John

[Wild Bill]

Of course the whole problem is that we know nothing of what Davis, Benjamin, Seddon, and others thought of all this because there are no papers extant from any of them on these things. So we operate on assumptions. Not one of Davis' biographers, for example, credits the assertions that are the basis of Come Retribution. The problem is that not everyone accepts your assumptions, no matter how slick they are argued, any more than they do mine, however poorly they may be argued. As you yourself have argued, the whole truth is unknowable; I dare say that not even a significant portion of it is knowable.

[Dave Taylor]

John,

Would it be possible for you to post Mr. Demond's letters to Finis Bates? I'd enjoy reading them.

[Lincoln Wonk]

Did anyone see this article on Tom Mudd in the Guardian. I think the statement from Tom about history being pliable is interesting. What do you all think?

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/...onspirator

[Jim Page]

(07-27-2015 05:23 PM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote:  statement from Tom about history being pliable is interesting. What do you all think?

I'm certain that Mr. Mudd hopes that it is true. Others might view such a statement as claptrap.

--Jim

[John Fazio]

(07-27-2015 04:28 PM)Dave Taylor Wrote:  John,

Would it be possible for you to post Mr. Demond's letters to Finis Bates? I'd enjoy reading them.

Dave:

I will work on it. I first have to find them. I will keep you advised.

John

[John Fazio]

(07-27-2015 06:04 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  

(07-27-2015 04:28 PM)Dave Taylor Wrote:  John,

Would it be possible for you to post Mr. Demond's letters to Finis Bates? I'd enjoy reading them.

Dave:

I will work on it. I first have to find them. I will keep you advised.

John

Dave:

I found them. Now all I have to do is figure a way to post them. I do not know how (I told you I am an ignoramus where computers are concerned). Linda will be in on Thursday. I'll ask her to give it a go. They are quite lengthy and in some cases hard to read in their original longhand. If worse comes to worst, I can always send you copies. Stay tuned.

John

[L Verge]

I sure hope Linda can scan and put those online because you have me totally confused as to why I have never heard or read of Demond before. His statement(s) would certainly have been picked up by someone else over the years unless they were just found recently in someone's attic. I have checked indices in the best books, The Evidence tome, trial transcripts, and cannot find any reference to him. I asked Joan Chaconas, who proofed your book and wrote the foreword, and she told me that she had questioned you about the same thing because she had never heard of him either.