Posted on 09/04/2002 10:29:32 PM PDT by MadIvan
A 137-year-old quest to clear the name of the Mudd family - descendants of the doctor jailed after he treated President Lincoln's fleeing assassin, John Wilkes Booth, for a broken leg - has reached the US Court of Appeal, only to run headlong into the modern war on terrorism.
Dr Samuel A Mudd - whose conviction in 1865 is thought to have given common currency to the phrase "his name is mud" - took Booth into his rural Maryland home, giving him shelter, food and fresh horses just hours after the assassin fled Ford's Theatre in Washington, where he shot the president during a gala performance of a play.
Booth broke his right leg when he jumped from the presidential box on to the stage.
Dr Mudd was found guilty of aiding the conspiracy, and served four years in prison before being pardoned by President Andrew Johnson.
His conviction by a military tribunal - established by presidential order in the frantic aftermath of Lincoln's shooting - remains on record.
Members of the Mudd family, led at first by the doctor's grandson, and now by his great-grandson, Thomas B Mudd, 61, have been fighting to expunge the doctor's record for 12 years.
Until recently, their argument - that the president had no constitutional right to send American civilians to a military tribunal - was little more than a historical curiosity to the government.
In light of the war against terrorism, all that changed. On Tuesday, Philip Gagner, the Mudd family's lawyer, found himself opposite one of the US government's top appeal lawyers, R Craig Lawrence, at a preliminary hearing.
A doughty Mr Gagner vowed to plough on yesterday. He said: "We've been arguing for 12 years that it is dangerous for the government to claim the power to try civilians in military tribunals, long before this war against terror. I'll keep arguing that for 1,200 years."
President George W Bush has claimed that power as he prosecutes the war against terrorism and a ruling against the government in the Mudd case could remove the option.
First, Dr Mudd's descendants have to prove that they suffer lingering harm from his conviction.
Thomas Mudd testified this week that during military training in his youth he was assigned extra latrine duties when instructors learnt who he was.
But Professor Douglas Linder, a legal historian who has written on the Mudd case, confessed to feeling little sympathy for Dr Mudd, a staunch advocate of slavery and an open sympathiser with the Southern cause during the Civil War.
He noted that the war had not technically ended at the time of the shooting and that Mudd stood accused of aiding in the murder of the president, commander-in-chief of US armed forces.
The appeals court is expected to rule within 60 days on the family's right to sue the government.
Regards, Ivan
In a similar vein, as long as we're on the topic, wasn't Ed McMahon, of "Tonight Show" fame, descended from the French Field Marshall McMahon?
That puts another wrinkle on it. All these years we've been told that Dr. Mudd just did doctor duties on Booth, with no mention of aiding and abetting and giving comfort to the enemy. The fresh horses is the smoking gun in my book if it is true.
I heard Mudd later got a commutation of his sentence after he worked in prison to doctor yellow fever victims.
I find this remarkably difficult to believe. This was presumably in the 60s. How many drill sergeants knew or cared about this pretty much long-forgotten event? The only way they would connect the name is if he went around bragging about his ancestor. There are quite a few people named Mudd.
"..their argument - that the president had no constitutional right to send American civilians to a military tribunal - was little more than a historical curiosity to the government.
Mudd was a southern sympathizer whose life was spared only becuase the military had no proof that he knew Booth prior to the assassination.
"We've been arguing for 12 years that it is dangerous for the government to claim the power to try civilians in military tribunals, long before this war against terror..." president George W Bush has claimed that power as he prosecutes the war against terrorism and a ruling against the government in the Mudd case could remove the option.
Bush, by executive order, has claimed the power to subject non-US citizen "enemy combatants" to military tribunals, NOT civilians. Big difference.
Booth's brother, Edwin, was a very famous actor who suffered a good deal of humiliation after Lincoln's death. But Edwin overcame the difficulties by demonstrating that he was not his brother. Unfortunately for Dr. Mudd, he did not immediately come forward and cooperate with authorities.
Since I haven't watched TV in about ten years, can anyone tell me what happened to Roger? He used to be a staunch defender of his ancestor from what I remember.
On another note. Every Latin American constitution (weak copies of the american one) has provisions giving the presidents broad powers, including the ability to declare a state of siege and during such emergencies establish miltary summary tribunals and the suspention of such constitutions.
One reason that latin Amrican democracies don't work well is these loopholes left to the executive branch. A remnant of the Spanich concept of "caudillismo" also refered to as "caciquismo".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.