The Union vs. Dr. Mudd (review)

BOOK REVIEWS439 also suffered a series of penetrations, the most famous of which was Stoneman 's raid in 1865. The fall of Fort Fisher, "the Gibraltar of the South," and the subsequent occupation of Wilmington resulted in Confederate loss of the mouth of the Cape Fear River, destroyed the Confederacy's last contact with the outside world, and closed down the Soudi's last port of entry for munitions from Europe. Sherman entered the state in March, 1865, and soon moved against Raleigh, last stop along the road to Bennett's farmhouse where in April, 1865, Johnston surrendered to him. Professor Barrett points out that North Carolina was a primary source of supply for Lee's operations in Virginia and that die blockade-runners slipping in and out of Wilmington played a significant role in keeping Confederate armies in the field. He emphasizes North Carolina's contribution to the Confederate war effort in terms of materiel but claims that the state's greatest gift was its manpower. With one-ninth of die population of die Confederacy , it furnished an estimated one-sixth or one-seventh of its soldiers and the author claims that one of every four Confederates killed in battle was a North Carolinian. Such figures, by their very nature, are hard to come by; but if they are indeed accurate, then North Carolina's losses far exceeded those of any other Southern state. While these three state studies have no common format, they deal with a number of similar topics. For example, each volume describes the secession movement on the local scene—the arguments advanced, the passions aroused, the mechanics employed for its consummation. They also, either directly or indirectly, deal with such military problems as raising, arming, equipping, and training troops as well as such domestic problems as collecting taxes, enforcing laws, struggling against financial chaos, and producing the food, clothing, and medical supplies necessary for maintenance of a tolerable living standard despite the blockade. To one degree or another, each state had to deal with the problems of desertion, dissident unionists within their borders , and of conducting business with the Confederate government. In each state there were, in addition, specific problems arising from the fact that part of its territory was actually occupied by enemy troops. The volumes reviewed here, based as they are upon substantial research, are genuinely valuable additions to the Civil War library. They not only provide balanced views of the social, political, economic, and military activities in their respective states but also, insofar as is possible, relate these activities to the larger picture of the war. In so doing, the three authors have added to our already vast store of knowledge about this profoundly significant period in our nation's history. Otis A. Singletary University of North Carolina at Greensboro The Union vs. Dr. Mudd. By Hal Higdon. (Chicago: Follett Publishing Company, 1964. Pp. 235. $5.95.) The basic facts concerning "The Union vs. Dr. Mudd" are well known and well established. Samuel A. Mudd, a Maryland physician of Southern 440CIVIL WAR history sympathies, tended the broken leg of John Wilkes Booth, gave him shelter, and aided him in his escape attempt. Shortly afterward Mudd was arrested and placed on trial as one of the Lincoln assassination conspirators. He pleaded that he had been unaware of Booth's identity and crime, but a special military court sentenced him to life imprisonment. He was confined at Dry Tortugas, where he displayed heroism ministering to fellow prisoners and the soldiers of the garrison during a severe yellow fever epidemic. After serving nearly four years he was pardoned by President Andrew Johnson and spent the remaining years of his life practicing his profession and professing his innocence. The great mystery in the case of Dr. Mudd is whether or not he bed when he stated that he did not recognize Booth and that he was ignorant of the actor's deed. The court believed he did, so did most contemporaries, and author Hal Higdon agrees. Mudd had twice before met Booth and on both occasions spent considerable time with him. Mudd at the trial falsely denied one of these meetings and also alleged that Booth...