The Madman And The Butcher by Tim Cook

by Tim Cook

Based on newly uncovered sources, The Madman and the Butcher is a powerful double biography of Sam Hughes and Arthur Currie and the story of one of the most shocking and highly publicized libel trials in Canadian history.Sir Arthur Currie achieved international fame as Canadian Corps commander during the Great War. He was recognized as a brilliant general, morally brave, and with a keen eye for solving the challenges of trench warfare. But wars were not won without lives lost. Who was to blame for Canada's 60,000 dead?Sir Sam Hughes, Canada's war minister during the first two and a half years of the conflict, was erratic, outspoken, and regarded by many as insane. Yet he was an expert on the war. He attacked Currie's reputation in the war's aftermath, accusing him of being a butcher, a callous murderer of his own men.Set against the backdrop of Canadians fighting in the Great War, this engaging narrative explores questions of Canada's role in the war, the need to place blame for the terrible blood loss, the nation's discomfort with heroes, and the very public war of reputations that raged on after the guns fell silent.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Canada, World War I, Military History, War, Biography

Hardcover

First published September 1, 2010

About the author

Tim Cook (1971 in Kingston - October 26, 2025) was a Canadian military historian and author.
Dr. Tim Cook was the Chief Historian & Director of Research at the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa, and a part-time history professor at Carleton University. He has also published several books about the military history of Canada during World War I.

Dr. Cook is a member of the Order of Canada.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Cook...

Reviews

[KB · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not sure exactly how I feel about this book, since it wasn't entirely what I expected. The book is largely split into chapters on each man, giving a biography and following him through the war. Obviously in a book like this, background information on Hughes and Currie is important, but for a good portion of the book there is really not much directly happening between the two as they rarely ever meet. Instead they are largely followed separately, save for the odd instance here and there.

Hughes for the most part was arrogant, rude, self-serving, stubborn and delusional. But you definitely have to admire the man's enthusiasm for the soldiers and the war effort, even if it was sometimes over the top. His uncompromising nature never wavered and followed him until the very end:

Hughes's name still carried enough clout to ensure that a private railway car was donated to bear him home. As the train pulled out of Ottawa, a conductor came back to the Hughes car and asked the pale and nearly lifeless Sir Sam if the engineer should be told to travel slowly for his comfort. Hughes rose from his bed, looked the man square in the eyes, and barked, "No! Tell 'em to go like blazes!"

Had someone else initially been in charge, getting that first contingent overseas might not have been done so quickly and Hughes put a face to the war effort. Currie seemed self-confident without being arrogant, intelligent but not brilliant, and a good general who was willing to take risks without being reckless. He got a long well with and respected his fellow officers, but the rank and file left a large disconnect from him. It's not that he didn't care for his men (he showed time and time again that he did), but he was not as friendly with them and didn't seem to know how to act around them. This would be the complete opposite of how he interacted with students at McGill.

Going back to my previous point, I think a lot could have been cut down. A thorough, but not overwhelming, biography, followed by perhaps a little less thorough account of their wartime experiences would have been better. Do we really need a thousand examples of Hughes being an asshole? No. I think scaling it back would still have been more than sufficient to give readers a good idea of both men and how they differed. This would also have shifted the focus to the latter portion of the book, where Hughes goes off against Currie. Is this not what the book is actually about?

But even this part is a bit lacking. We don't get to Hughes' condemnation of Currie, who he felt was wasting Canadian lives, until about 280 pages in, and this only lasts for a couple chapters. Hughes died a few years after the war, so in a sense this is what ended things directly between them, but his accusations lived on after he passed away and Currie dealt with this for the remainder of his life. So, there's a lot of build-up in the book, but it doesn't exactly amount to much. I was expecting some sort of huge throw-down between the two, but this never happened. As Hughes got older everyone seemed tired of his shit-stirring and found his tirades to be pathetic, and the result of a man in poor health. And Currie actually did very little to publicly defend himself against regurgitated forms of Hughes' accusations - save for when he sued a small-town newspaper for their statements about him needlessly sacrificing Canadian lives at Mons when he knew the war was going to end, which is by far the best part of the book.

I think Cook did a good job of providing a fairly balanced account of the two men. Currie definitely does come out on top, but Cook does not shy away from including Currie's faults and where he faltered, just as he applauds Hughes when it is deserved and writes about how fairly few historians have attempted to view him in anything resembling a positive light. But I'm not entirely sure what this book is supposed to be since the "sensational wars" between the two barely take up any space. I loved reading about both men, but if I wanted biographies, I'd pick up a biography. In fact, I'd almost take Hughes out altogether and just focus on Currie and his reputation, adding Hughes in when needed.

[Daniel Kukwa · Rating 4 out of 5]

The only issue I have with this otherwise excellent work is that the author tries a bit too hard to offer some apologies for Sam Hughes' reprehensible behaviour during WWI. The fact of the matter is that he really doesn't need or deserve it, based on the clear evidence presented. A book about Canada's ultimate polar opposites during WWI...and it's about time it came along. It should be required reading for all students of that time period.

[Emerson Stokes · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fairly amazing book about two of the most important figures of Canada’s First World War narrative.

Sam Hughes, if he is remembered at all, is mainly known as an insane politician who brought nothing but scandal and fear to his political office. While this may be partly true, it doesn’t tell the whole story. Hughes was an adept politician, and his ability to stay the MP of Victoria-Halliburton in early 20th-century colonial Canada for 30 years shows not only his capabilities but his popularity amongst certain people. While his methods often led to scandal and a hint of corruption, Hughes was the main driver in forming the Canadian Corps and structuring Canada’s war effort. He helped to amass a large volunteer army from a relatively small population in the early war. It should go without saying that even terrible people can be good at what they do.

Arthur Currie’s military experience is remarkable but leaves many complex questions for Canadian history. Currie probably is one of the best generals of the war. Despite how successful Vimy was for the Canadian Corps, it’s odd that it is one of the few battlefield successes Canadians remember when many of Currie’s later campaigns as the commander of the Corps were arguably similarly successful and possibly more strategically important (by the end of the war the Canadian Corps just seemed to be out for the blood of German divisions). Despite this however, it’s hard to reconcile Currie’s successful wartime experiences with his prewar embezzlement scandal, perhaps showing that the man was still capable of blundering severely.

For military historians, the book raises questions about the politicization of the military. How much should civilian personnel intervene in military affairs? A military that is uncontrolled by a country’s political system is dangerous to the country and to everyone else around it, but it is also true that politicians and bureaucrats can meddle with the military to its detriment. For Canada in WW1, Hughes may have been able to help the army get on its war-footing, but his culture of political patronage allowed officers to rise the ranks who would’ve had less chances under a more meritocratic system. Additionally, him attempting to bring Canada’s generals into the murky arena of parliamentary politics left rumours lingering about Currie’s reputation that almost followed him into the grave. This book surely gives a lot to think about for the military historian.

[Arseni Kritchever · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tim Cook writes very well for a professional historian. During my undergrad and graduate degrees in history I've had to read a lot of academic articles and books and Mr. Cook writes better than most of them. He also spins a very interesting and engaging yarn about arguably the two most famous Canadian-born military leaders: Minister Sam Hughes and General Arthur Currie. "The Madman and the Butcher" is at once a biography, a military history, and a political history, but while it succeeds with aplomb in some areas, it fails somewhat flat in others. I found the actual military history of the Canadian military contributions during WW1 to be somewhat lacklustre compared to other texts, and the biographical elements to be sometimes either tedious or inconsequential. However, I found the discussion of the vicious inner politics of Canadian and British militaries to be really interesting, as well as the discussion of the acrimonious legacy of both Hughes and Currie and its impact on the Canadian memory of the Great War. On the other hand, I found Cook's rather obvious bias in favour of Currie to be rather distracting.

So all in all, very engaging read, but it perhaps tries to do too much in such a short space, and doesn't succeed on all fronts. Much like Sir Sam Hughes I suppose!

[Caleb Emmons · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first of many Tim Cook books to be read

[Caer Glas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent character study of Hughes, Currie, their actions through WWI and their relationship. I thought it might have been a grind to read, but found I fairly flew through the book. Like his study of gas warfare, Cook has given us an in depth look at a subject matter that has usually been dismissed in a few paragraphs.

Well worth reading, IMO.

[Kevin · Rating 2 out of 5]

A butcher knows how to cut meat efficiently to achieve the desired piece. Seems to me "butcher" is the correct term when it comes to describe Currie, and the use he put men to in WWI. Perhaps that is what prevented parliament from officially recognising him at the time. Recognising him would be tantamount to admitting their own guilt.

And Hughes was also not inappropriately described as a "madman" either, as a great part of this biographical excavation of an age old rion-rivalry that became a war of reputation fought largely well after one of the main characters dies, attests to.
Both were terrible people, who, despite being terrible people, excelled at making war during WWI.

What is perplexing, about this take is that Hughes was not complex, as is suggested. He was useful and that made him tolerable. The author even cites the words of Hughes' boss (PM Robert Borden) to this effect. Hughes is a historical bad guy a hundred years dead. So why offer a rehabilitating hand out now?

In that sense Currie was also useful. He put to use on the battlefield the mobilization Hughes sought behind the lines. Though similarly he is held forward, and only the slightest space is given to a critical evaluation of his role.

While I did appreciate the author's view on the nationalistic historical revisionism of the take 'Historica Canada' has in regards to Currie and Vimy Ridge, overall despite the appearance of objectivity of this book, I think the position of the author towards his subjects is parochial and, because of this narrowness he is left to provide an analysis of it's main characters that is tantamount to throwing one's hands in the air in exasperation. It's ironic to level accusations of nationalistic historical revisionism in an account that takes the war, it's reasons and it's consequences, for granted. I

[Mark Adkins · Rating 5 out of 5]

When it comes to Canadian military history, Tim Cook has constantly written excellent books and this book lives up to his reputation.

The two names that you will hear a lot about when reading World War One Canadian history are Sir Sam Hughes, the Minister of Militia and Defence, and General Sir Arthur Currie, who ended the war as the Commander of the Canadian Corps. This book chronicled each of these men throughout the First World War and the ramifications of the war on their post-war lives, and how their lives were intertwined.

I found the book to be an interesting read, the author did a good job of keeping things neutral, not just showing all the flaws of the people or their assets. A lot of the books that talk about Sam Hughes just mention his massive ego and the arrogant way he ran his ministry during the early stage of the war but fail to acknowledge his success at deploying Canadian troops to Europe to fight in the war. Same with General Currie, you hear a lot about his planning skills and how he kept casualties as low as possible (unfortunately it is impossible to have zero casualties in battle) but you don't always hear about his failures (except for the embezzlement, that is always talked about), This book did both giving the reader all the information.

One of the best parts of the book was at the end reading about the liable trial and the effect it had on Gen Currie, very tragic to have to go through that.

If you are interested in military history then I recommend this book as it sheds light on two of the pivotal Canadian personalitis involved in World War One.

[Maurice Tougas · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tim Cook, Canada's preeminent military historian, takes a comprehensive look back at the two most important Canadian figures of the First World War, the politician Sam Hughes, and the military man General Arthur Currie.
The provocative title of the book describes the reputations of both men. Hughes was the madman, and he may well have been off his rocker. Despite some sympathy from Cook, Hughes – who built the Canadian military virtually from nothing in the Great War – calls Hughes "vain, outrageous and at times monstrous in his views," this "barmy bully" was frequently referred to by his contemporaries (and historians) as crazy. Currie was anything but crazy, a military man who didn't make a move until he was sure it was the right idea, but was driven to an early death by the pressures of leading so many Canadian men to their deaths. Hughes did everything in his considerable power to destroy the reputation of Currie, spreading the false rumours that Currie sacrificed the lives of his soldiers for his own self promotion. The Madman and the Butcher is a bit of a slog at times, particularly if you are not into details about Canadian military victories in WWI, but aside from that it's an even-handed, eye-opening look at a now mostly forgotten page in Canadian history.

[Wanda · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an excellent, well researched and well written book about two important figures in Canadian history during World War One. Sam Hughes was the politician who organized the militia into an army and prepared them for their entry onto the Western Front. Arthur Currie was the general who lead these troops, the Canadian Expeditionary Force, on the Western Front and during some of the most horrendous battles of the war. Under Currie's leadership, the CEF gained the reputation as the army that got the job done. This book provides biographies of the two men and the interactions between them that eventually led to a trial that questioned Currie's leadership during the war and, in the end, exonerated him of any wrongdoing. There is so much information in this book that it is not easy to write a review. I applaud Tim Cook for making this an enjoyable, readable book about an episode in Canadian history that needed to be analyzed and told. I believe that any student of WW1 needs to read this book from cover to cover.

[R G G Currie · Rating 4 out of 5]

The ‘madman’ is Sir Sam Hughes who was the Minister of Militia in Canada when WW1 broke out. The ‘butcher’ is Sir Arthur Currie who commanded the Canadian Coros during the final months of WW1. Hughes blamed Currie for not promoting his own son Garnet, and astensinku for the needless deaths of Canadian soldiers toward the end of the war, particularly during the recapture of the Belgian. Out of Mons on November 11, 1918. It resulted in a spectacular trial for libel.

[Phillip Sawyer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Marvelous account of two of the most important Canadian characters of WW1. Sam Hughes was so over the top I think only “Monty Python” could do him justice. Currie was a fine general but there were still huge losses fighting the Western Front. There was no easy solution to industrial warfare. Read the book!

[Bernie Charbonneau · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another great in depth novel of the two most recognized Canadians involved in the Great War by one of Canada's leading historians. This was a fascinating novel that should be read by every Canadian especially at this time where we are in the 100 year anniversary of this world conflict.

[Rob Tesselaar · Rating 5 out of 5]

An engrossing history of two of the most influential Canadians of the First World War. Echoes of these two men continue to reverberate in Canadian military culture and arguably in Canadian civil-military relations. Cannot recommend highly enough.

[Jedediah Gorham · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book transported me to a different time, and yet there is something familiar. Politicians concerned about power and their egos versus men given hard tasks, and get the job done. Well written and engaging.

[Ben Page · Rating 5 out of 5]

Just awesome Canadiana.

[Dave · Rating 2 out of 5]

Based on strucutre, tone and content, the book would be 3 or 4 stars. The fact that Canadian military history is thoroughly disappointing has earned it two.

[Lyle Lawson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent! A well written story of two very interesting people during the early 20th century.

[Erin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tim Cook’s popular history, The Madman and the Butcher tackles the biographies of Canadian WWI figures, Sir Sam Hughes and Sir Arthur Curries, respectively. For those of you not up-and-up on your Canadian history, Sam Hughes worked as the Minister of Militia and MP before/during/after WW1, and Arthur Currie served first in the war as a brigadier general and eventually as the Lieutenant General of the Canadian Corp (the first Canadian, rather than a British soldier, to command a corp of Canadian soldiers).

While Cook’s history purports to be about balancing the historical record in terms of the “reputations” of each man — Hughes and Currie, have both at various points between 1914 and the present been libeled as the titular ‘madman’ and ‘butcher’ respectively — it is tilted much in favour of redeeming, and in some respects resurrecting the fading history of, Arthur Currie.

I am not at all opposed to this move on the part of Cook, I just wondered whether the book might have benefited (a great deal) from making Currie the explicit focus, rather than including the oftentimes strained and repetitive chapters on Hughes. While I appreciate the desire to set up an opposition between the two men (an opposition mirrored by Hughes’s eventual and aapparent hatred of Currie), the chapters on Currie are by far the more engaging (particularly the section on the famous libel trial).

I admired Cook’s efforts to refract growing Canadian nationalism and the successes of the Canadian corps through biography. I’m not sure the effort was successful in the case of Hughes, as his nationalist vigour to mount an impressive Canadian civilian-soldier army is tempered by his imperialist vision and the relatively minor impact he played after 1916. In the case of Currie, however, Cook does well to demonstrate the parallel struggle of Currie to establish his individual authority and the Canadian Corps’s growing recognition both home and abroad as an identifiable (and formidable) unit.

I am less impressed by the repetition in the middle section of the book, in particular, (as mentioned) with reference to Sam Hughes’s ego, lies and slander. I do think that rather than describe each battle the Canadian corps participated in, Cook might have done better to select several battles that represented key points in Currie-cum-Canada’s development, rather than the (sometimes exhausting) description of each movement of artillery.

The last third of the book that deals with the libel trial is engaging and engrossing, and does a terrific job of getting at Cook’s purported intent of addressing the “war of reputations.” Again, this “war” has nothing to do with Hughes, and everything to do with Currie. Hence, a book that is far better at dealing with the butcher, than the madman.

[Leigh · Rating 5 out of 5]

I had been both looking forward to and dreading reading this book. Dreading it because sometimes history books fail to engage the reader, wanting to only get the facts and numbers onto the page. I looked forward to it because while I had read books and seen documentaries on Sam Hughes, I knew very little about General Currie and wanted to learn more. I found myself pleasantly surprised by this book. Every spare moment I had in the day, lunch break at work, a day off, I would immediately grab this book and start reading again. The scenes of battle so well told you almost felt you were on the front lines with the soldiers. It was difficult to put down and even though we know how the story ends, I know I wanted to see if through to the end. I think that this book captured the good and the bad sides of both men, neither was perfect, mistakes were made by both, but they also both had moments of brilliance as well. As I said it was an engaging book, one of the better books on military history or even Canadian history that I have read and I would recommend to anyone who is interested in learning more about Canada's role in the First World War.

[Elyse Mady · Rating 4 out of 5]

By choosing to explore the Canadian War experience through two of its most well-known (yet often enigmatic) figures, Sir Sam Hughes and Sir Arthur Currie, Cook opens a fascinating window into characters often lost behind the mythology of Vimy Ridge and Ypres.

Men with almost diametrically opposed temperaments: bombastic/laconic, impulsive/meticulous, self-aggrandizing/personally reticent, he's mined the men's lives and experiences during WW1 in a meticulously researched fashion. I learned much about the political background of Canada's contributions to the European war and also gained a better insight into the post-war difficulties that the country was faced with as it attempted to come to terms with its sacrifices and losses.

A strongly written, balanced examination of the men, their times and the trials they, and Canada, faced during the War to End All Wars.

[Emily · Rating 3 out of 5]

This easy to read (of course it was... Tim Cook who teaches at Carleton wrote it...) dual biographical history book was pretty good. I enjoyed the layout of the book, which walks the reader through the tough decisions and hairy situations that both Hughes and Currie landed themselves in. Often at the expense of the other. I think Cook wants to be Pierre Berton, which is admirable, but his attempt falls short. He is not bad at utilizing anecdotes throughout the text, much in the style of Berton, but it does not have the same cadence or elegance that Berton always shows. It's an informative text and gave me new insight into these famous Canadian men - from the halls of Parliament Hill to the Front itself - this book shows you everything. Keep trying, Cook, maybe one day you can actually be as good as Berton was.

[Don Thompson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Had read Tims other books "At the Sharp End 1914-1916" and " Shock Troops 1917-1918" which had covered Canadians in WW1. I had not expected to have another book but this one was needed. I was always under the impression that General Currie was a great Canadian. He fought for and got Canadian soldiers to fight together as a national Army. He won some of the great battles of the war. Due to him we tried new tactics that saved lives and earned us victory's and Laurels.
I was not ever aware of the cost of the last battle of Mons or what was called the 100 day campaigne and the last attack on the last day of the war. That this led to Arthur Currie being called a butcher. This book captures the facts being and presents both Arthur Currie and Sam Hughes in very different light and the political battle that raged after the war.

[Adrian]

The story of Canadian WWI general Arthur Currie and his nemesis Sam Hughes, minister of militia. Cook is clearly more interested in Currie but he does his best to show Hughes to be more than a jingoistic tub thumper. Still he fails. Hughes' toxic personality coloured everything he did. Cook does better with Currie who is still considered this country's best general. However can Cook really claim that Currie wasn't wantonly destructive of his troops? Canada lost 60,000 men in that war and a good portion of them under Currie's command. Yes, he was ordered to make hopeless attacks- those above Currie deserve blame no less than Currie. Douglas Haig has been demythologized in England why are we still bucking up Currie?

[H Wesselius · Rating 3 out of 5]

At times Cooke attempts to be fair but between Hughes and Currie its difficult not to favour the latter. Well written, the twin biography provides a vehicle to discuss the origins of memory and remembrance. Both characters in this way are protagonists in the story of Canada, WWI and independence. The book builds slowly but is worth reading to the end despite the tendency to iconography which seems omnipresent in Canadian military history.

[Heep · Rating 3 out of 5]

This falls somewhere between 3 and 4 stars. The subject is very interesting and essential to those interested in Canadian history. Tim Cook is a good - but not great - writer. His writing style is a little repetative and puts too much emphasis on conclusions. The source materials are not always covered well, and where he cites facts he doesn't always select his material well. Still this book is easy to read and entertaining.

[Kimberly · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm definitely biased on this one. I love Tim Cook's books and Arthur Currie is one of my favourite Canadians. So I really liked reading him talk about how Hughes and Currie experienced the war, one as a politician on the home front, and one rising the ranks on the Western Front. He talks about how Hughes has ended up vilified by historians and Canadians while Currie has risen to the status of a national hero. I really enjoyed it, but that was to be expected.

[Raimo Wirkkala · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very engaging look at a pivotal point in Canadian history and 2 men who played huge roles at the time. Always pleasing to find an author who can write about history in an accessible and compelling way.

[Bill Bell · Rating 5 out of 5]

Of considerable interest to me if only because two of my uncles served in the Canadian Corps all those years ago. This book is very readable and provides lots of background about the people and times involved.

[Kevin · Rating 3 out of 5]

4/5 for Sam Hughes, 3/5 for Arthur Currie, and 5/5 for being an essay-saver.