Mary Edwards Walker - Medal of Honor Recipient

[cutiger83]

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/american-civil-war/mary-edwards-walker-woman-ever-receive-medal-honor-2.html

Mary Edwards Walker

 

She was born in New York State in 1832 in the town of Oswego. Mary was the youngest of seven children. Her parents were determined their one son and six daughters were given equal opportunities. Dissatisfied with the standard approach in schools, they founded their own local school to ensure girls would receive the same education as boys.

 

When the Civil War began, Mary volunteered to join the Union Army. Despite her qualifications, she was employed as a nurse as the army did not recognize women as surgeons. As the war progressed, she was able to use her skills and did work as a surgeon but only by doing so as a volunteer. She was on the front lines at some of the most famous Battles including the First Bull Run, Battle of Fredericksburg and the Battle of Chickamauga.

 

Later the Union Army changed its policy. Perhaps it realized that highly skilled women like Mary were too good a resource to waste. In 1863 she became the first women to be appointed as an Army surgeon serving first with the Army of the Cumberland and later with the 52^nd Ohio Infantry.

 

In 1865 Mary Edwards Walker received the Medal of Honor in recognition of her services to the government and the “patriotic zeal” with which she devoted herself to tending the wounded.

However, in 1917 Congress revised the criteria for the Medal of Honor to include only those involved in active combat. This decision resulted in 910 recipients including Mary being asked to hand back their medals. Mary refused and continued to wear it until her death two years later at the age of 86.

 

In 1977 the decision was reversed. Mary Edwards Walker’s medal was posthumously reinstated meaning that today she remains the only woman to have received this honor.

 

 

 

[MMcollector]

A few photos:

 

 

[FFZFlyer]

There is no more controversial recipient and award than the one to Mary Walker, whether the original award or the 1970s one.

 

I have never seen any contemporary documentation to indicate that she served "on the front lines" at any battle, let alone the ones you mentioned.

 

She was later allowed to serve as a "contract surgeon", which was just that - she signed a contract to work for the army as a civilian. She had no rank. She was captured and held captive for a few months but was released back to her unit, allegedly because her captors grew tired of her complaining..

 

Almost immediately after the war Walker submitted applications for a pension based on her wartime service. She was repeatedly told she was not entitled to one since she was a civilian contractor. Never one to talk no for an answer, Walker continued her quest for a pension, going so far as to write President Johnson, frequently. He finally asked if she could be placated by giving her one of the "usual" medals of honor. The War Department did.

 

The March 1863 amendment to the original MH law restricted the medal to those who had displayed "gallantry in action." The 1916 review board did not revise that criteria, simply enforced it, primarily because of the 800 plus awards to the 27th Maine Inf for staying in Washington, DC a few days beyond their contracted enlistment obligation until Lee was defeated at Gettysburg.

 

Others who lost their awards then included civilian army scouts, several whose heroism involved fire fighting, the Lincoln pallbearers, etc. Mary Walker fell into that group since she, just like the scouts, was a civilian and not entitled to a medal.

 

You can find scores and scores of information on the Walker controversy but it essentially lay unnoticed until the 1970s, during the feminist movement, that her remaining ancestor, I believe great niece, began petitioning the army to reinstate the award based on gender discrimination. Long story short, Carter caved and signed the bill restoring her medal. This led to restoration of the scout's awards down the line.

 

I'm sure this will ignite even more controversy, but all evidence indicates Walker thrived on that, so its appropriate.

[cutiger83]

There is no more controversial recipient and award than the one to Mary Walker, whether the original award or the 1970s one.

 

I have never seen any contemporary documentation to indicate that she served "on the front lines" at any battle, let alone the ones you mentioned.

 

She was later allowed to serve as a "contract surgeon", which was just that - she signed a contract to work for the army as a civilian. She had no rank. She was captured and held captive for a few months but was released back to her unit, allegedly because her captors grew tired of her complaining..

 

Almost immediately after the war Walker submitted applications for a pension based on her wartime service. She was repeatedly told she was not entitled to one since she was a civilian contractor. Never one to talk no for an answer, Walker continued her quest for a pension, going so far as to write President Johnson, frequently. He finally asked if she could be placated by giving her one of the "usual" medals of honor. The War Department did.

 

The March 1863 amendment to the original MH law restricted the medal to those who had displayed "gallantry in action." The 1916 review board did not revise that criteria, simply enforced it, primarily because of the 800 plus awards to the 27th Maine Inf for staying in Washington, DC a few days beyond their contracted enlistment obligation until Lee was defeated at Gettysburg.

 

Others who lost their awards then included civilian army scouts, several whose heroism involved fire fighting, the Lincoln pallbearers, etc. Mary Walker fell into that group since she, just like the scouts, was a civilian and not entitled to a medal.

 

You can find scores and scores of information on the Walker controversy but it essentially lay unnoticed until the 1970s, during the feminist movement, that her remaining ancestor, I believe great niece, began petitioning the army to reinstate the award based on gender discrimination. Long story short, Carter caved and signed the bill restoring her medal. This led to restoration of the scout's awards down the line.

 

I'm sure this will ignite even more controversy, but all evidence indicates Walker thrived on that, so its appropriate.

 

There are many accounts of her having served in those battles. What are you referring to that states she never did?

 

She volunteered for the military as a surgeon but was not allowed because they did not have women so she was a nurse. Yes she later did volunteer as a contract surgeon which was mentioned above. However, I have never heard of this "alleged" complaining while as a POW. Where is your documentation "alleging" she was complaining or was this just some unsubstantiated allegations?

 

Yes she was a champion for women's rights. Yes she served during the war. She was awarded a disability pension for partial muscular atrophy she developed while a POW. Why would the president "placate" her by giving her a "usual" medal of honor rather than a pension? Makes no sense and where is your documentation on this placating allegation?

 

Yes, hers was restored in 1977 while the medals for Cody and 4 Alamo Scouts had theirs restored in 1989. Where does it say anything about Carter caving in just for her?

 

While this one may be considered controversial, there were others as well. You have mentioned a lot of allegations about hers being controversial but have shown nothing to prove these allegations.

[cutiger83]

Here is more about her from the Army website:

 

http://www.history.army.mil/news/2016/160200a_maryEdwardsWalker.html

 

As you can see, it states she and other Union doctors were exchanged for Confederate doctors. If she was exchanged along with other doctors, it makes sense that she was exchanged for other doctors rather than the “alleged” complaining statements.

 

“Captured by Confederates in April 1864, she spent four months as a prisoner of war before she and other Union doctors were exchanged for Confederate medical officers.”

[LuftStalg1]

I have no heartburn with Mary. I find the story interesting and worthwhile. I am sure she had an impact on the Women's movement. Worst case scenario it is a testament to the "Squeaky Wheel" theory. And I am sure a lot of Civil War POW's complained, and many more died from poor treatment and conditions. Thanks for the link cutiger83, I had never seen that photo of her in old age.

[tarbridge]

[kanemono]

Very interesting post! Thank you.

Dick

[FFZFlyer]

Cutiger83, you requested sources regarding Mary Walker’s controversial MoH. There are plenty to be had and I'm a little surprised you didn't find them.

 

I noticed your reference was one of many internet sites that provide biographical information on Walker. Unfortunately, most of these sites simply copy their data from another site, without attribution in most cases, and this perpetuates the misinformation. That's one of the problems with relying solely on the internet for information.

 

My first source is the report of the 1916 Army Review Board. In their review of the documentation that justified the award to Walker the board included a Sept 30, 1865, letter from the Secretary of War: “Secretary Stanton returns application in behalf of 996 (all army MoH recipients up to that time were assigned random numbers so that the review board would not know who the recipient was and, thus, any prejudice would be eliminated) for appointment as surgeon, inviting attention to adverse report of Surgeon General. Indorsement, President Johnson, October 23, 1865, desires report if there is any law under which an honorary or complimentary brevet might be conferred?”

 

Note that her application was, apparently, for an appointment as a surgeon in the army, not a medal. It is also interesting to note that, in those days, the president’s involvement in what surely must have been a minor administrative matter. There has not been a reoccurrence of this level of presidential pettiness until recently.

 

Vol. 4, No. 4, of the Medal of Honor Historical Society’s Annals, June 1982, notes that “Stanton well knew there was no provision for “honorary or complimentary” brevets. He also knew that one of the reasons the Medal of Honor had been established was to restore the scandal-ridden brevet system to an honorable position. He also had made use of the Medal of Honor earlier that year to recognize members of the 27^th Maine and that seemed to satisfy them. Wouldn’t a Medal of Honor satisfy Dr. Walker? He thought so for, on November 13, 1865, he penned a note to the War Department’s chief clerk instructing him to prepare a Medal of Honor for Dr. Walker.”

 

Per the 1916 review board’s notes, Dr. Walker acknowledged receipt of the medal on January 24, 1866.

 

The Wikipedia listing for Walker contains the testimonial that accompanied that medal:

 

“Whereas it appears from official reports that Dr. Mary E. Walker, a graduate of medicine ‘has rendered valuable service to the Government, and her efforts have been earnest and untiring in a variety of ways’ and that she was assigned to duty and served as an assistant surgeon in charge of female prisoners at Louisville, Ky., upon the recommendation of Major-Generals Sherman and Thomas, and faithfully served as contract surgeon in the service of the United States, and has devoted herself with much patriotic zeal to the sick and wounded soldiers, both in the field and hospitals, to the detriment of her own health, and has also endured hardships as a prisoner of war four months in a southern prison while acting as contract; and Whereas by reason of her not being a commissioned officer in the military service, a brevet or honorary rank cannot, under existing laws, be conferred upon her; and Whereas in the opinion of the President an honorable recognition of her services and sufferings should be made. It is ordered, That a testimonial thereof shall be hereby made and given to the said Dr. Mary E. Walker, and that the usual medal of honor for meritorious service be given her.”

 

 

Note that the testimonial is not a citation. It states that Walker has “rendered valuable service” without specification; essentially the award was for “services rendered,” a common phrase you would normally write on a check for a minor expense. In no place is there any mention of any battlefield, or near battlefield, heroics or gallantry. Indeed, the testimonial specifically states that the “usual medal of honor” is granted for “meritorious service,” a clear violation of the then existing regulation. Even given the lax standards for the Medal of Honor that existed at that time, this is clearly not a ringing endorsement.

 

Further note where the proclamation states that she “served as an assistant surgeon in charge of female prisoners at Louisville, KY., upon the recommendation of Major-Generals Sherman and Thomas…” Remember that phrase.

 

In its final report, the review board stated its justification for the revocation of 911 Medals of Honor. For case 996 the board stated: “This was a contract surgeon whose service does not appear to have been distinguished in action or otherwise.”

 

Your internet source notes that Walker was “on the front lines ……including First Bull Run, Battle of Fredericksburg, and the Battle of Chickamauga.” The June 4, 1977 issue of the New York Times article on the restoration of her award states she arrived in Washington, DC “after First Manassas” which is what the Confederates called First Bull Run. The Women in History website listing for Walker at www.lkwdpl.org/wihohio/walk-mar.htm, has this to say about that: “In July 1861, just after the Battle of Bull Run, Mary went to Washington, DC to join the Army as a Medical Office. She was denied, so she volunteered – serving as acting assistant surgeon at the hospital set up in the U.S. Patent Office.

 

“In 1862, Mary went to Forest Hall Prison in Georgetown, but felt her services were not especially needed so she returned to New York. She earned a second medical degree from Hygeia Therapeutic College and, and by November, returned to Washington (must have been a short course). After the Battle at Fredericksburg, Mary worked as a field surgeon near (italics mine) the Union front lines, treating soldiers in a tent hospital……” Not “on “ the front lines, but “near” the front lines. Big difference.

 

Sources vary about her next position. Your source simply states “In 1863, she became the first women (sic) to be appointed as an Army surgeon serving first with the Army of the Cumberland and later with the 52d Ohio Infantry.” The Women in History site notes, “In September 1863, Mary was appointed assistant surgeon to the 52d Ohio Infantry in the Cumberland, based in Chattanooga, Tennessee….” The WIH sites further notes “The men were outraged; Dr. Perin, director of the medical staff, called it a ‘medical monstrosity’ and requested a review by an Army medical board of Walker’s qualifications, doubting she knew much more than ‘most housewives.’” The website www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=42772 states, “In 1862 she received an Army contract appointing her as an assistant surgeon with the 52d Ohio Infantry.” The site, http://ngeorgia.com/ang/Mary_Edwards_Walker states “she served in an Army Hospital in Chattanooga, Tennessee, at which time she was a ‘volunteer surgeon,’ during the Battle of Chickamauga September 19-20, 1863. So, there is some confusion about when her contract with the army commenced.

 

What isn’t in dispute is that on April 10, 1864, while wearing her self-made makeshift army officer’s uniform, including trousers, and armed with two pistols, she was captured near the Georgia-Tennessee border and taken prisoner. Your source notes “while assisting a surgeon from the Confederate Army who was carrying out an amputation she was captured…” The WIH site notes that she made “many trips into Confederate territory to help civilians…” The ngeorgia site states “On a number of occasions Dr. Walker would cross enemy lines to assist Georgians whose lives had been destroyed by the Civil War. Women and children lived in swamps and low ground near water, frequently sick or near death. Dr. Walker would treat these victims with supplies taken from Federal stores.” One can only imagine what the Union soldiers felt when their limited supplies were used to comfort the enemy. Regardless, most sources agree she was not conducting surgery, as an assistant or otherwise, with an enemy doctor (I can’t imagine that scenario) when captured.

 

The WIH site notes that she was held at Castle Thunder, near Richmond, VA. “She complained about the lack of grain and vegetables for prisoners…” She also refused to don the female garments given to her by her captors.

 

On August 12, 1864, she was exchanged back to the Union lines. Per the WIH site, “She was proud that her exchange was for a Confederate surgeon of the rank of major.”

 

Following her release, the WIH site states that she served “six months administering patients at the Louisville Women’s Prison Hospital and then finished out the war serving at an orphan asylum in Clarksville, Tennessee.” The ngeorgia site states “she was released in time to help during the battle for Atlanta as a surgeon in Louisville, Kentucky.” Per the WIH site, Walker left Federal service on June 15, 1865.

 

Per the MOHHS Annals, “After the war Dr. Walker began a campaign to receive a pension for an illness contracted while a prisoner. Unfortunately, the U.S. government did not grant pensions to civilians and Dr. Walker was advised of this policy. She was not about to stand for that type of a brush off. Dr. Walker instituted a program of harassment of every member of Washington officialdom she could identify, up to an including President Johnson.” The letter writing campaign apparently spurred Johnson’s October 23, 1865 letter to Stanton, as noted above.

 

The WIH site indicates that Walker was paid $766.16 for her wartime service. She later did receive a pension of $8.50 per month for an eye injury that led to partial muscular atrophy. Because she herself believed the problem to be temporary, Walker had earlier declined an offer of $25 per month. The site does not provide a date for the awarded of the pension. However, it does state that in 1872, after the problem intensified, she petitioned for a raise to $24 per month, or a lump settlement of $100,000 (a massive sum, for sure, in 1872, and not bad today, either). Her petition was rejected. In 1890 she received an increase to $20 per month.

 

To further contribute to the confusion, the ngeorgia site states “After the Civil War Walker was recommended for the Medal by Generals William T. Sherman and George Henry Thomas.” The defense.gov site says “”The Army nominated Walker for the Medal of Honor for her wartime service. President Johnson signed the citation on Nov. 11, 1865.” The WIH sites states, “Upon the recommendation of Majors Generals William T. Sherman and George H. Thomas, on November 11, 1865, President Andrew Johnson signed a bill to present Dr. Mary Edwards Walker with the Congressional Medal of Honor for Meritorious Service.”

 

All of these are incorrect. Recall the phrase in her testimonial I earlier asked you to remember? Here it is again: “…served as an assistant surgeon in charge of female prisoners at Louisville, KY., upon the recommendation of Major-Generals Sherman and Thomas…” This clearly states that her service at the female prison in Louisville was at the recommendation of these two general officers (one can only speculate as to why these two general officers did not want her treating male soldiers again). Nowhere does it indicate that they recommended her for the Medal of Honor. If they had it would have been noted in the review board deliberations and may have made a difference in its ultimate decision to rescind her award. How this phrase morphed into a recommendation for the Medal of Honor is unknown. Perhaps a careless researcher/writer misinterpreted the phrase for their own agenda.

 

Finally, the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress, stated in its March 30, 2006, report “Medal of Honor: Its History and Issues,” (and repeated in its 2015 update):

“Perhaps one of the more contentious awardings (sic) of the Medal of Honor involved the case of the Civil War civilian contract surgeon Mary Edwards Walker. She was awarded the Medal of Honor by President Andrew Johnson on November 11, 1865, for ‘services rendered during the war.’ She was an extremely flamboyant and controversial character, and it has been argued that the award was made to placate her being terminated by the Army.”

 

In the 1960s one Anne Walker, per the defense.gov site, launched an intensive lobbying campaign to restore her aunt’s medal (Anne Walker has been variously described as a “great-grand niece,” or “granddaughter” in the ngeorgia listing, or simply a “distant relative,” in other references). Anne Walker’s efforts were denied during President Nixon’s and Ford’s administration. As the feminist movement gained momentum she continued her efforts and in 1977 the army’s Board for the Review of Military Records approved the restoration of Walker’s award. I clearly remember the controversy over this decision among historians, feminists, and members of the military. There was a lot of public pressure on President Carter to reject the recommendation (I remember writing a letter myself). However, in my opinion, he took the politically correct move and signed the bill (as he later would with the award to Anthony Casamento). The same controversy erupted when the Post Office put her on a stamp a few years later.

 

Although the army scout’s medals were not restored until 1989, Walker’s restoration set the precedent for other civilians to receive the Medal of Honor. I understand her 1977 medal is on display in the Pentagon and her 1866 medal is in the Oswego, New York, her hometown, historical museum.

 

Dale Walker, no relation I believe, authored a biography of Mary Walker. It has been a number of years since I read it and do not own a copy, but I recall he went into some detail about her military service which aided in debunking much of the information about her.

 

I hope these prove my “allegations” regarding her.

 

You state that there are “many accounts of her having served in those battles.” Please provide your sources to substantiate that claim. And I don’t mean repetitive websites. I’m interested in contemporary records/accounts that authenticate her placement “on the front lines,” and serving in those battles. Something along the lines of a report from a commanding officer or contemporary that places her on the front lines.

[LuftStalg1]

My great great grandfather served in the Civil war. In his documents is a citation regarding being a POW. However, in his diary he was sick and in a hospital when his unit was captured and made a POW. The official government listings are incorrect although bases on some usually safe assumptions. So I add a little salt to my coffee when I research anything. It is an interesting story and at the very least it seems Walker just wanted to be treated as an equal when women simply not not. And she seems to have been serious about her oath as a physician, assistant or not. She seems to have had an impact and a place in history now, intended or not. It seems this issue may have some connection to the development of the "Tiffany" version and purpose? An interesting topic all around, thank you all for adding to the thread.

[cutiger83]

Why would the president not be involved in the first application for a woman requesting to join the Army as a surgeon? This was unprecedented at the time. You act as if this was extraordinary. In addition, the 27^th Maine was awarded the MOH as an incentive to reenlist. Why is it so much more controversial that they tried to do the same with Mary Walker? Is it because hers was reinstated and theirs was not? Hers was for actions during the war and not for a reenlistment incentive so no comparison.

 

In your original post you stated she was released “ allegedly because her captors grew tired of her complaining”. While she did complain about the lack of food, etc, I am quite sure that MANY prisoners complained about the lack of food. It states she was exchanged along with other doctors on both sides. It states nothing to do with anyone growing “tired of her complaining”.

 

During the 1800’s women were considered unfit for duties such as being a surgeon. The fact that men did not want a woman operating on them does not surprise me at all. I am sure it had more to do with prejudice than capabilities. If she was considered so unfit, why was she still a surgeon with the Army during the war? Obviously, she was not found unfit for duty.

 

Regarding her helping Confederate soldiers, there are countless records of people on both sides helping the other side. You state “One can only imagine what the Union soldiers felt when their limited supplies were used to comfort the enemy.” Wouldn’t this have happened to anyone helping the “other side.” Why do you consider her helping Confederate soldiers, women and children so much worse than what the others did?

 

Regarding her campaign to receive a pension, how are her actions any different that any soldier from the beginning of time? Is it because she was a civilian surgeon? How many soldiers have had illnesses arise after the initial diagnosis and tried to get more benefits? How is she any different than anyone else?

 

You state a report showed ”She was an extremely flamboyant and controversial character, and it has been argued that the award was made to placate her being terminated by the Army.” Yes she was a champion for women’s rights, health care, POW rights, etc. Yes, she helped Confederates. Yes she wore men’s clothes. At that time in history, she certainly was a controversial character but it was because of her championing for rights not because of her abilities. If she was discharged in June of 1865 and awarded the MOH in Oct of 1865, the military sure did “placate” very quickly didn’t it? Notice the report said “argued that” but nothing about confirming they “placated” her.

 

Since you wrote letters against reinstating the medal in 1977, you obviously do not feel she should ever have gotten the medal. Is it because you don’t believe civilians should have ever been awarded the medal? If so, did you also write letters against the Army scouts medals being reinstated? If not, then why not? Why are you so adamant that she should never have received the MOH?

[cutiger83]

My great great grandfather served in the Civil war. In his documents is a citation regarding being a POW. However, in his diary he was sick and in a hospital when his unit was captured and made a POW. The official government listings are incorrect although bases on some usually safe assumptions. So I add a little salt to my coffee when I research anything. It is an interesting story and at the very least it seems Walker just wanted to be treated as an equal when women simply not not. And she seems to have been serious about her oath as a physician, assistant or not. She seems to have had an impact and a place in history now, intended or not. It seems this issue may have some connection to the development of the "Tiffany" version and purpose? An interesting topic all around, thank you all for adding to the thread.

 

 

Thank you for your input! Very interesting about your great great grandfather.

 

...Kat

[cw1979]

Cutiger,

 

I apologize but I disagree completely with you on this matter.

 

Being social progressive does not merit a Medal of Honor.

 

Mary Walker did not then nor does she now deserve the award.

[cutiger83]

Cutiger,

 

I apologize but I disagree completely with you on this matter.

 

Being social progressive does not merit a Medal of Honor.

 

Mary Walker did not then nor does she now deserve the award.

 

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

 

Do you feel the same way about the scouts who had their MOH restored?

 

However, social progressiveness was certainly not the case in the first time she was awarded the medal. I also don't believe social progressiveness was the second time either.

[uniformcollector]

Forgive me if this is repetitive (I honestly did not fully read the responses), but if the criteria (official or not) was different when Ms. Walker received her award, shouldn't she still be entitled to it? Let's not permit the award if a similar case arose after the criteria became more strict, but isn't taking it away doing so under standards that did not exist earlier?

[Foxfall]

“DR” MARY E. WALKER AND THE MEDAL OF HONOR

 

On June 10, 1977, Robert L. Nelson, who was then the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, issued a memorandum to the Adjutant General in which he directed, “That the Department of the Army records pertaining to Mary E. Walker be corrected to show that she was validly awarded the Medal of Honor by President [Andrew] Johnson in 1865; that her name was selected to be entered on the Medal of Honor Roll, in accordance with the Act of 3 June 1916, and that the action taken in 1917 to remove her name from the Medal of Honor Roll is void and of no force, or effect.” Exactly who was this woman; how did she come to receive the Medal of Honor, why was it revoked, and why was it restored?

 

The story of Mary E. Walker and her Medal of Honor is a sad tale that combines confusion during the fog of war nearly 140 years ago; ineptitude at a high level within the War Department; and contemporary political correctness run amok. Her story is somewhat complicated and difficult to piece together because it is not supported by official, factual records.

 

Mary Edwards Walker was born on November 26, 1832, on the Bunker Hill Road in Oswego County, New York, to Alvah and Vesta Whitcomb Walker. She had one brother (Alvah) and four sisters (Cynthia, Aurora, Luna, and Vesta). Her father was a farmer, carpenter, and some-time school-teacher. He was reportedly a self-taught “student of medicine” whose ideas sometimes drifted towards the unorthodox. For example, he was of the opinion that his daughters “were hampered by the tight-fitting clothing” of the day. According to a biographical sketch prepared by her nephew, she was a school teacher when she was young, but there is no indication that she attended college (which would not have unusual at the time).

 

In February of 1855 she graduated from Syracuse Medical College at the age of 22, following two 12-week semesters. She thus obtained her Doctor of Medicine degree on the basis of less than a full year of formal education; moreover, the Syracuse Medical College was a proprietary institution owned by one Stephen Potter, and apparently went broke the year after she graduated. The school was never affiliated with a recognized college or university and was never part of the current Syracuse Medical School. At the time it was regarded as an “eclectic medical school” that emphasized drugs and herbs instead of surgery or the other regular medical school curricula. It is important to remember that in the middle of the Nineteenth Century medical education in the United States was unregulated and physicians were not licensed. Indeed, many “doctors” were men who simply served an apprenticeship to a practicing physician and then hung out their own shingle. Mary Walker’s medical education was almost certainly well beneath the low standards of the time.

 

Following medical school she married a fellow student, Albert Miller. However, she refused to take his name and apparently their effort to set up a joint medical practice in Rome, New York failed. They were divorced in 1869. Shortly after the outbreak of the Civil War she moved to Washington, DC where she sought a commission as a surgeon in the Army. Although her request was turned down, and she reportedly served as a volunteer on an informal basis in a makeshift hospital in Washington. This service was not a matter of record and was not documented in Army records. She apparently continued in this non-medical capacity until early 1862, when she worked for a short while at the Forest Hall Prison in Georgetown. In March of 1862 she went to New York to study at the “Hygea Theraputic College.”

 

On November 2, 1863, Mary Walker sent a letter to Edwin M. Stanton, the Secretary of War, in which she asked for the authority to “get up a regiment of men to be called Walker’s U.S. Patriots.” She asked for permission to enlist them “in any legal states” and for the authority to inform her soldiers that she would act as “First Assistant Surgeon.” The files in Records Group 94 in the National Archives do not contain an answer to her request, but she clearly did not receive permission to raise her own regiment. In February of 1864, at the request of the Surgeon General (apparently on the “recommendation” of a prominent Senator), she was furnished transportation to Louisville, Kentucky, where she reported to Assistant Surgeon General Wood.

 

She subsequently went to Chattanooga, Tennessee, where she met an Examination Board that passed on her qualifications. On March 8, 1864, the following report of the Examining Board was sent to Surgeon General Perin:

 

We have the honor to report having examined Dr. Mary E. Walker in compliance with your instructions. She is utterly unqualified for the position of Medical Officer. The Board examined her patiently upon the several branches of the usual curriculum, but she disclosed such ignorance as to render it doubtful whether she has pursued the study of medicine. The board is further of the opinion that her practical acquaintance with diseases and the use of remedies is not greater that most housewives posses. The Board would except obstetrics, with which she seems to be more familiar. As a nurse in a general hospital, the Board believes her services may be of value and we respectfully recommend her for that position.

 

The report was signed by Robert Bartholow, Assistant Surgeon, USA (Recorder), J. Perkins, Surgeon, USV, and F.H. Gross, Surgeon, USV (President). Apparently, she was offered a position as a nurse and on March 11, 1864 she was directed to “report without delay” to Colonel Daniel McCook, Commanding Officer, Third Brigade, Second Division, 14th Army Corps. On March 12, 1864, Assistant Surgeon General Wood forwarded the report of the Examining Board. Special Orders Number 8 of March 14, 1864, states that, “Dr. Mary Walker having reported to this brigade by orders of General Thomas is hereby assigned for duty to the U.S. 52nd Ohio Volunteer Infantry.” Although it was recommended that she be employed as a nurse, at some point she apparently assumed the status of a military physician, although there is no evidence in the record that she was officially appointed to such a position.

 

A month later she was captured by the Confederates and taken prisoner of war. On the date of her capture a memo was forwarded to the Adjutant General recommending that she be paid as a contract surgeon from March 11, 1864, at the rate of $80 a month. On August 12, 1864, she was released during a prisoner exchange; however, in a letter dated August 19, 1864, Colonel E.D. Townsend in the Adjutant General’s Office informed General Thomas, “The female doctor Mary E. Walker has been released and is here. There is no evidence of her having been connected with the Service so as to entitle her to pay and allowances.” Ms. Walker was apparently in a financial pinch and wanted some money. On August 20, 1864, Major General Thomas sent the following reply:

 

Mary E. Walker came to Chattanooga last winter with a letter from Assistant Surgeon General Wood to Surgeon General Perin recommending her for employment in some of the hospitals. As I now remember, Surgeon Perin employed her as a nurse in the hospital, at which she expressed dissatisfaction and desired to be sent to the Fifty-Second Ohio as Acting Assistant Surgeon so that she might get through the lines and get information of the enemy. I consented to let her go and she was soon afterwards captured.

 

According to records of the War Department, on August 23, 1864, Major General Thomas forwarded by telegraph a copy of the orders by Major General McCook assigning her to the 52nd Ohio Infantry and recommended that she be paid as a contract physician from March 11 to August 23, 1864 at the rate of $80 a month. General Thomas’ telegrams were referred to the Adjutant General’s Office on August 24, 1864, for their opinion and recommendation. In addition, Ms. Walker apparently also informed the Adjutant General that she had never received any contract as Acting Assistant Surgeon and claimed that her appointment was “purely nominal to enable her to gain information from the enemy.” Ultimately, the Secretary of War recommended that she be compensated as a contract physician, for which she was eventually paid $436.36 for her services between March 11 and August 24, 1864. This means that her employment was purely as a civilian, and at no time did she hold a commission in the United States Army. Apparently, she was paid because she appeared under orders and was taken prisoner while supposedly trying to gain information from the enemy. In reality, the Army was simply trying to figure out what to do with her. If she was indeed trying to act as a spy, her tradecraft was absurd. She later claimed that she crossed the lines in a full army uniform wearing the green sash of a surgeon to treat civilian victims. If true, this would have virtually guaranteed that she would have been captured.

 

There is no official record of her performance between March 14 and the date she was captured. However, one historian reported that “the men seemed to hate her, and she did little or nothing for the sick of the regiment.” She apparently spent her time passing through the lines to practice her profession among the citizens in the surrounding area, representing herself as a Union physician in the rank of first lieutenant. Although she later claimed to have gained information that led General Sherman to “so modify his strategic operations as to save himself from a serious reverse and obtain success where defeat before seemed to be inevitable,” that claim is not supported by the official record.

 

In any event, following her release by the Confederates she was employed under contract at $100 per month and assigned by Assistant Surgeon General Wood to work in the Female Military Prison at Louisville, Kentucky, where she remained until March 22, 1865. From April 11 to May 17, 1865, she was on duty at the Refugee Home in Clarksville, Tennessee until her contract was terminated. During the period she was employed at the Female Prison, “complaints of cruelty towards the prisoners were made against her and her removal from control over the prisoners, except when sick, [was] recommended by Medical Inspector Coolidge and Major Henry Plassner, Provost Marshal.”

 

Immediately after the war, she solicited testimonials on her behalf from a number of prominent individuals and had them sent to the War Department and the White House. It appears from some of this correspondence that she was using the rank of major, and she apparently wanted an appointment in one of the former Confederate states as an Army Medical Director. Alternatively, she wanted formal recognition of her service in the form of a commission or brevet. The President responded to this pressure by asking the Secretary of War to look into the matter to see if there was some way she could be recognized for her service. The Secretary of War sought the opinion of the Judge Advocate General, who, in a memorandum dated October 30, 1865, noted that:

 

It is understood that this party – having been actively employed during the war in hospitals and in the field in the capacity of a surgeon – desires from the government some formal acknowledgement of the value of her services, in the nature of a commission or brevet as United States Surgeon; and that, while she asks that such appointment shall date from the period at which she first entered upon the performance of her work, she does not and will not apply for any pay as an officer, and will resign her commission upon its being once fully granted and accepted.

This proved to be a serious problem for the Army. At that time the Army did not commission females and had no desire to change its policy; moreover, the Army was still mindful of the results of her Board of Examination and certainly did not want to commission an obviously incompetent physician. In addition, there was absolutely no possibility that they would grant her a line commission. Moreover, she could not receive a brevet because she never held a substantive rank. However, the Judge Advocate General did feel the Army might be obliged to acknowledge her past service – even if most of it was based more on her recounting than anything contained in the official record.

 

At this point the Army apparently fell upon a solution: give her the Medal of Honor. At this point the Medal of Honor did not enjoy the prestige it does today, and giving her the medal no doubt seemed like the perfect solution to the problem. President Andrew Johnson signed her citation on November 11, 1865, and the medal was presented to her on January 24, 1866, by Brevet Major General E.D. Townsend, the Assistant Adjutant General. The medal was inscribed on the reverse, “The Congress to Dr. Mary E. Walker.” The War Department thought the problem was over, little realizing that Mary Walker would be a thorn in their side almost until the day she died, fifty-four years later.

 

Had she been officially recommended for a Medal of Honor, the actions upon which that recommendation would have been based would have taken place between March 14 and April 16, 1864 – the 34-day period between her arrival with the 52nd Ohio and her capture by Confederates. Unfortunately, there is no record of her activities during that period, other than what she claimed (or what was claimed on her behalf over a century later by a distant relative). There are neither witness statements nor records that set forth her activities. However, she never was recommended for the Medal of Honor: it was given simply as an administrative action in response to pressure she generated to obtain a commission or a brevet.

 

On April 27, 1916 Congress approved an Act to provide for the creation of a Medal of Honor Roll. This Act authorized any person on the Roll upon reaching the age of 65 to apply a gratuity of $10 a month. The Act specified that the applicant’s Medal of Honor had to have been won by action involving actual conflict with an enemy in which the person distinguished himself by conspicuous gallantry or intrepidity at the risk of life, above and beyond the call of duty. Walker applied to have her name entered on the Medal of Honor Roll, but she was informed on May 22, 1916 that she was not eligible to have her name entered because she had not received the medal for action “involving actual conflict with an enemy, by gallantry or intrepidity, at the risk of life, above and beyond the call of duty.”

 

On June 3, 1916 Congress passed an Act (Section 122 of the Army Reorganization Bill) to provide for the appointment by the Secretary of War of a board of five general officers for the purpose of “investigating and reporting upon past awards or issues of the so-called Congressional Medal of Honor by or through the War Department; that with a view to ascertain what medal of honor, if any, had been awarded or issued for any cause other than distinguished conduct involving conflict, with an enemy – in which case said board shall find and report that the said medal was issued for any cause other than that specified, the name of the recipient of the medal so issued shall be stricken permanently from the official Medal of Honor list.”

 

The Board created by the Act of June 3, 1916, convened on October 16, 1916, and by January 17, 1917 had considered all 2,625 Medals of Honor which had been awarded up to that time. A total of 911 names were removed from the Medal of Honor list, including Mary Walker, because the Board could find no evidence of distinguished gallantry in her case. Mary Walker refused to surrender her medal, and in fact wore it for the rest of her life.

 

Her life and career following the Civil War are well documented. It is clear that she was unsuccessful as a physician and became increasingly eccentric as the years went on. She wrote two books, one of which was a sexual advisory for men in which she declared that masturbation would soften the brains and that a man’s child would assume the appearance of his mistress. She also worked a largely unsuccessful lecture tour. She characteristically dressed on men’s clothing and had herself photographed lying in a casket. In 1917 she attracted considerable publicity when she telegraphed Kaiser Wilhelm and suggested that he and the other world leaders meet at her farm to iron out their differences. Nor was she a stranger to Congress: she constantly lobbied Congress to grant her a large lump sum of money or a pension greater than that received by nurses. A total of twenty-five Bills were introduced at her request and on her behalf, all of which died in committee. Finally, in 1898 a special relief Bill was passed that increased her pension from $8.50 to $20 a month.

 

The matter would have rested at this point, but in 1977 a free-lance writer by the name of Anne Walker (also known as Helen Hay Wilson), who identified herself as a “distant niece” of Mary Walker, took up the cause. She lobbied for a memorial to Mary Walker and petitioned for the restoration of her Medal of Honor. She held press conferences and solicited funds and support for her cause. She petitioned the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records to restore the medal and led a media blitz on behalf of her efforts. The principal witness to testify on behalf of Mary Walker was, not surprisingly, Anne Walker.

 

The Board for the Correction of Military Records recommended that the medal be restored; however, their decision was not unanimous. One dissenting member stated that there was “insufficient evidence to show [Walker] performed an act, or combination of acts, of such significance as to warrant the award of the Medal of Honor ... There is no evidence of such gallantry to merit the nation’s highest decoration.… It appears [Walker] was awarded the Medal more in reconciliation for not having given her a commission than for any particular deed or heroism.” Anne Walker’s response? “It’s a pile of crap.” The Board’s recommendation was accepted, and Walker’s medal was restored. Her name appears in the Pentagon’s Hall of Heroes, which lists the recipients of the Medal of Honor, and she is prominently mentioned to all who take the Pentagon Tour.

Source: Planchet Newsletter, Vol. 4, No 4 (#16), Winter 2002, pages 1-5

[FFZFlyer]

Cutiger83, what you wrote last is totally irrelevant. Earlier you said there were sources that confirmed Walker was "on the front lines." Please, what are these sources? You ignored the question in your response. Personal opinion is not a valid source.

 

In your last meanderings you said there are "countless records" of soldiers on both sides helping the others. I wonder how Georgians in the path of Sherman's March felt about that. Again, if there are countless records, please count out just a few.

 

There are two factors to consider regarding the validity of Walker's medal: Was she eligible for it and and did she earn it?

 

Was she eligible for the MoH under the then existing regulations? The answer is a clear NO since those regs, the March 3, 1863 amendment to the original July 12 1862 law, required one to be a member of the military. Mary Walker was a contract surgeon, not a member of the military. That is a fact, indisputable.

 

Did she perform any act of "gallantry in action" that would have merited the award? Again, a clear NO as she was never in action. This is another fact, indisputable.

 

Again, valid sources, not just repetitive web sites, to support your contentions.

[cw1979]

 

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

 

Do you feel the same way about the scouts who had their MOH restored?

 

However, social progressiveness was certainly not the case in the first time she was awarded the medal. I also don't believe social progressiveness was the second time either.

Two answer your questions;

Civilian scouts should not have been awarded the Medal of Honor then or later.

I respectfully disagree about progressiveness not being a part of the Republican party at the time we are speaking of; they made slavery illegal (controversial to say the least); stripped people of their property without compensation (slaves; very controversial); they held that former Confederate citizens did not have rights such as voting (very controversial); they made former slaves citizens (most controversial) and they argued for even further punishments for the southern states.

 

They were extremely progressive and many of their decisions were based on such.

[FFZFlyer]

Source: Planchet Newsletter, Vol. 4, No 4 (#16), Winter 2002, pages 1-5

Was this Borch or who?

[collectsmedals]

For anyone interested Dr. Mary Walker is buried in the Oswego Rural Cemetery just West of Oswego NY. I visit her grave, the the graves of all the Medal of Honor recipients buried in Oswego and Onondaga counties New York every Veteran's Day.

[juvatwad]

Cutiger,

 

I apologize but I disagree completely with you on this matter.

 

Being social progressive does not merit a Medal of Honor.

 

Mary Walker did not then nor does she now deserve the award.

What he said, Truth...

[aerialbridge]

Outstanding and fascinating scholarship, FFZ. Thank you for your time to post it.

[cutiger83]

Cutiger83, what you wrote last is totally irrelevant. Earlier you said there were sources that confirmed Walker was "on the front lines." Please, what are these sources? You ignored the question in your response. Personal opinion is not a valid source.

 

In your last meanderings you said there are "countless records" of soldiers on both sides helping the others. I wonder how Georgians in the path of Sherman's March felt about that. Again, if there are countless records, please count out just a few.

 

There are two factors to consider regarding the validity of Walker's medal: Was she eligible for it and and did she earn it?

 

Was she eligible for the MoH under the then existing regulations? The answer is a clear NO since those regs, the March 3, 1863 amendment to the original July 12 1862 law, required one to be a member of the military. Mary Walker was a contract surgeon, not a member of the military. That is a fact, indisputable.

 

Did she perform any act of "gallantry in action" that would have merited the award? Again, a clear NO as she was never in action. This is another fact, indisputable.

 

Again, valid sources, not just repetitive web sites, to support your contentions.

 

My question asking if you also wrote a letter regarding the scouts is relevant because you admit that one of the criteria for disqualifying Walker was the fact that she was a civilian. This same scenario falls true for the civilian scouts.

 

While the citations for the scouts from the Indian Wars only states “gallantry in action”, I did find a civilian scout from the Civil War whose medal does not show “gallantry in action”, William H Woodall. He was Chief Civilian Scout for Major General Philip H. Sheridan’s Cavalry Corps. His citation states “Captured flag of Brigadier General Rufus Barringer’s headquarters brigade”.

 

http://www.cmohs.org/recipient-detail/1514/woodall-william-h.php

 

 

 

While there may be some confusion as to which battles in which she served, the Army History website in my post above as well as the CMOHS website also list: Battle of Bull Run, Chickomauga, and the Battle of Atlanta.

 

http://www.cmohs.org/recipient-detail/1428/walker-dr-mary-e.php

 

You started this conversation by stating alleged items irrelevant to what you are now saying is the criteria for being awarded the medal, “gallantry in action”. By doing so, you are only trying to discredit her rather than show facts about her service during the war. For instance, you stated she was released as a POW “allegedly because her captors grew tired of her complaining” where this has been shown she was exchanged along with other surgeons. You stated President Johnson wanted her to be “placated” by being given the medal which is also unproven. You stated “Carter caved” which is also an allegation.

 

As far as showing evidence of people from the North helping people from the South or vice-versa, these stories have been read and heard from different places. I was born and raised in the south. My entire life, I have read books about the Civil War. My entire life, I have heard my family stories as well as family stories of my friends. I have discussed on this forum how my Great-Great Grandfather threw my Grandfather’s school history book about the Battle of Manassas in the fireplace saying “Those are a bunch of Yankee lies. I was there and that did not happen”. It has been stated that history is written by the victors.

 

Many of the exploits of early women have been lost or forgotten. It does not surprise me that it is hard to find information about Walker. Even in relatively modern times, the stories of the WASP in WWII were hidden until finally in 1977, the records were unsealed after an Air Force press release erroneously stated the Air Force was training the first women to fly military aircraft for the US.

 

Hopefully one day, the true story of Dr Mary Walker will be discovered. Until that time, we can only speculate but nothing has been shown as indisputable evidence.

[cutiger83]

Forgive me if this is repetitive (I honestly did not fully read the responses), but if the criteria (official or not) was different when Ms. Walker received her award, shouldn't she still be entitled to it? Let's not permit the award if a similar case arose after the criteria became more strict, but isn't taking it away doing so under standards that did not exist earlier?

 

 

 

You bring up a valid point. The following items are from the CMOHS website. http://www.cmohs.org/medal-history.php

 

 

“When President Abraham Lincoln signed S.J.R no. 82 on July 2, 1862, the Army Medal of Honor was born. It read in part:

 

Resolved by the Senate and House or Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby, authorized to cause two thousand “medals of honor” to be prepared with suitable emblematic devices and to direct that the same be presented, in the name of the Congress, to such non-commissioned officers and privates as shall most distinguish themselves by their gallantry in action, and other soldier-like qualities, during the present insurrection (Civil War). “

 

At that time, Walker would have fallen under the “other soldier-like qualities.

 

Due to a large number of men submitted for the Medal of Honor after the Battle of Little Big Horn, a review board was established along with the criteria being modified. However, the new criteria did not state “gallantry”.

 

The CMOHS website also states that on June 26, 1897,

 

“With more than 700 Civil War soldiers applying for Medals of Honor since 1890, President William McKinley had directed the Army to establish new policies regarding Medal of Honor applications and awards. Publish on this date the new regulations:

 

- Established Medals of Honor could only be awarded for “gallantry and intrepidity” above and beyond that of one’s fellow soldiers

- Required that a submission for the Medal of Honor be made by a person other than the veteran who had performed the heroic deed

- Required the testimony under oath of one or more eyewitnesses to the heroic deed

- Set a time limit of one year for any person to be submitted for the Medal of Honor for an act occurring after 26 June 1897

Also note that this change regarding "gallantry" is for an act occurring after 26 June 1897.

[TheMariner]

I have read both sides of this argument and come to the same conclusion as two of the above posters also did, Walker did not deserve the MOH nor did she have any right to receive it in the first place. It was a "shut up" award which was obviously somewhat successful. Not one thing i have read about her states she was ever a part of a single heroic act. I also strongly believe the medal should be given to military personal only, which she was not.

I am all for civilian being honored for heroic acts, police officers, Firemen, Ems and even your regular civilian who goes above and beyond the call of duty and risks their life. That is exactly why awards like the public safety officer medal of valor were created. Then we have the medal of Freedom but that medal is a joke. To make a long story short, her acts were not heroic nor were they deserving of a medal of any sort. I know people who have made a much greater contribution to saving lives and have never been given a single award, even though they genuinely deserved it. I find it a shame we give medals out due to political correctness and not for actual valor.