THE LITTLE MAGICIAN

    “Your crimes will be attended with the most dreadful consequences, humanity will weep over the scene. You have brought desolation into all your families. No less than three widows and how many little ones I do not know, will in a single moment mourn your loss. You have cast a stain on your posterity. Ignominy and shame will attend your hapless children through the whole course of their mortal existence. Can a mortal man be in a more awful situation than you are now at this place?” – Hon. William W. Van Ness The Report of the Trials of the Murderers of Richard Jennings

    One of the most powerful families in New York State, the Irish Clintons, settled in the hamlet of Little Britain in Orange County, New York, a short horseback ride from Goshen. The Clinton family had ruled over the state of New York, as politicians and military men, for generations. Governor George Clinton piloted the province during the revolution, and was vice-President under Jefferson and Madison. His brother General James Clinton, along with General John Sullivan, effectively rid New York of the Six Nations of the Iroquois, and their “extensive fields of corn.” General James Clinton was the father of the current governor of the state in 1819; the visionary prison and canal builder, Dewitt Clinton. The Clintons knew the Coldens, Wisners, Sewards, and Judge William W. Van Ness.

     Dewitt Clinton also knew my great….grandfather Isaac Jennings, personally toasting the man (my brother Bird has the crystal glasses) appointing him to a seat on the circuit court in Montgomery. Dewitt Clinton was all too familiar with the travails of his community back home, and was no friend to his own State Attorney General, Martin Van Buren. Geographical inequities within the state were always at issue. 

     Van Buren and his opposition Bucktail/Regency party were synonymous with “machine politics,” pay offs and nepotism in New York State. The partisan Dutchman, known as the “little magician," invented the antebellum spoils system in New York. Clinton and Van Buren butted heads constantly over policy and politics, and the Jennings case was no exception. The Governor was well aware of the Jennings affair and Van Buren’s grandstanding downstate. He read Judge William W. Van Ness’ letter with increased interest. This could be a golden opportunity to talk of mercy and gain some political currency in the process. Judge Van Ness was asking for a pardon for one man and one man only. Clinton was listening. 

      Dewitt Clinton had his hands full; not with social discontent, but with building prisons and revolutionizing rapid transit. With the help of Auburn Judge, Elijah Miller, Clinton was pushing construction of a brand new prison in the little frontier town of Hardenbergh Corners (Auburn), New York, while simultaneously attempting to get the funding to build his “wonder of the world,” the Erie Canal. He would succeed at both; filling his prison with inmates and building his massive canal, transforming New York State from a provincial New England backwater into a conduit to the far west and a global, economic superpower. 

     To Dewitt Clinton’s amazement Judge Van Ness’ letter was not a plea for leniency on behalf of any of the three white men, Teed, Conklin, or David Dunning, but of Henry G. Wisner’s client, the black man Jack Hodges. The Governor couldn’t believe what he was reading. “….I accordingly recommend Hodges (a black man), as a fit object of pardon. Whether the pardon, however, ought to be absolute or conditional, is worthy of serious consideration.” This was the same Judge Van Ness, who, only a few weeks before had informed Jack Hodges that he had no chance whatsoever of reprieve, and to prepare for the netherworld to come. What suddenly changed the Judge’s mind?  

     The Hon. William W. Van Ness offered a strong case for sparing the state’s star witness, Jack Hodges. His eloquent pleas described each of the condemned; separating the malefactors into separate categories—“principles” and “accessories.” Van Ness spared no detail in describing the crime and Jack’s admitted participation in it. So there was no confusion as to what he was asking. He repeatedly emphasized that Jack Hodges was “a black man,” and (with David Dunning) identified Hodges as a “principle.” David Conklin and James Teed were both named as convicted, sentenced to death accessories and coconspirators. None were recommended for pardons. The Judge assured Governor Clinton that he had conferred with both the New York Supreme Court, and polled members of the jury; all having the utmost confidence in the star witness’s integrity, and the Judge’s wisdom, in his recommendation for leniency of Jack Hodges. 

    Judge Van Ness explained how important Hodge’s testimony, “candor, frankness and consistency” had been in proving and convicting the men and woman in the conspiracy. This was bigger than hanging any one individual and Van Ness wanted to be very clear in his recommendations. Jack Hodges had helped the state prove, for the very first time, a criminal “murder for hire,” conspiracy in New York. They never could have done it without Jack. 

      The Judge’s sudden change of heart is another puzzling development, further complicating any simple reading of the facts in this case. Why would Van Ness advocate for a pardon only for Jack Hodges at this late date? Ex-cop Michael J. Worden chalks it up to Judge Van Ness’s “character and integrity.” The prosecutors had already proven their case, convicting all five in the conspiracy. Judge Van Ness was under no obligation to do anything more. Was it his conscience and “compassion,” or had the fix been in all along? Had William W. Van Ness, and Martin Van Buren conspired with, or without, the defense lawyers’ or prosecutors’ knowledge to pardon Jack Hodges due to some unknown motivation? Had the "Little Magician" pulled something out of his top hat that nobody expected? Collective historical memory is so short in comparison with the present administration; we now think men like John Kerry and the Bushes were somehow dignified and noble. Doctors say that loss of ability to detect certain odors precedes, and can predict, dementia. Am I crazy, or can you smell that?