LIARS; Coswell V Jefferson

 

I believe the vitriolic newspaper man Harry Croswell may be best understood by a story he told about himself. One of his victims, a physically huge politician named Hagedorn, spotted the young muckraker crossing the street in the river port boom-town of Hudson, New York (above). 

Brandishing his whip, Hagedorn leaped from his wagon and accused the unprepared Croswell of slandering him in his newspaper.  As a crowd quickly gathered.  Harry calmly responded that he did not believe that Hagedorn would “whip” him. 

The offended justice exploded in a stream of profanity and then remounted his carriage and whipped his “poor horse” instead. As the angry man disappeared down the street a witness asked Harry how he could have been so certain Hagedorn would not have used the horse whip on him, to which Harry replied, “Mainly because I planned to run away.”

Harry lived in a world not so different from our own. True, he never experienced the joys of indoor plumbing, nor the miracles of modern medicine, but his America was a land bitterly divided, plagued by partisanship, confused by conspiracy theories right and left, and afflicted with a media that fanned the flames of discord in the name of profit. Of course, the American republic of Harry Croswell’s day had a valid excuse for its childish behavior; it was little more than a child itself.

First, Congress had passed the Naturalization Act, of 18 June, 1798. Openly supported by outgoing President George Washington, (above), this law required anyone applying for citizenship first be a resident for at least 14 years. (At this point it had only been 22 years since the Declaration of Independence) and just 11 years since the Constitution was ratified.

Then there was the Alien Friends Act, of 25 June, which authorized incoming President John Adams (above) to deport any resident alien whom he personally considered dangerous. This was followed by the Alien Enemies Act of 6 July,  which allowed the President to deport any alien whose original nation was currently at war with the United States. And finally, there was the Sedition Act of 14 July, 1798. This made it a crime to publish anything “false, scandalous, and malicious” about the government or its officials. Taken together these were the Alien and Sedition Acts.

The acts were the intellectual creation of the Federalist President John Adams, and his Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton (above).

And few in the country had any doubt the laws were intended to be used against the friends and allies of Vice President Thomas Jefferson (above).

To oversimplify the situation, the Federalists were in favor of a strong central government, while Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans were in favor of strong states. The contest between the two philosophies seemed to have been decided in 1800 when Jefferson was swept into office, succeeding the one term Adams. But as soon as President Jefferson had the reins of power in his hands he began to beat the same horse President Adams had.

In fact most of this flailing was started by 22 year old Republican attack dog James Callender,  With Jefferson’s personal approval Callender had actually called the father of the American republic, George Washington,  a traitor.  It was Callendar's job to spread filth and conspiracy theories about any person Jefferson wanted to destroy.  In self defense the Federalists promoted their own liars and frauds. 

The “tall, and manly” Harry Crosswell, was the son of a Connecticut preacher. His tutor had been the old Federalists, Noah Webster, of the dictionary fame. Harry began his career as an assistant editor on "The "Balance" a Hudson, New York Federalist newspaper. 

But in 1802 when Hudson Republicans started an attack sheet called “The Bee”, Harry convinced his publisher to fund a Federalist four page attack sheet in response, called “The Wasp”. He wrote under the pen-name of “Robert Rusticoat”, and pledged that “Wherever the Bee ranges, the Wasp will follow…the Wasp will only strive to displease, vex and torment his enemies .” And boy, did he.

But the worst attacks on Jefferson which  Crosswell printed came appeared after 1801, after President  Jefferson refused to name James Callender Postmaster for Virginia.  Feeling betrayed, Callender turned on his one-time master.  In his own Virginia newspaper, Callander detailed how Jefferson had fed him word for word the vile attacks upon Washington. And it was Callander who first printed the story of Jefferson’s liaisons with his slave, Sally Hemings, and their many offspring. And Harry Crosswell reprinted every one of the salacious details in The Wasp.

In January of 1803, Harry Croswell was dragged before three part-time Republican judges and charged with “... being a malicious and seditious man, and of depraved mind and wicked and diabolical disposition, and also deceitfully, wickedly and maliciously devising, contriving and intending, toward Thomas Jefferson, Esquire, President of the United States of America, to detract from, scandalize, traduce and vilify, and to represent him… as unworthy of the confidence, respect and attachment of the people of the said United States…”
Now this was nothing new for Harry Crosswell.  He was constantly being confronted by his targets such as the angry Mister Hagedorn, either on the street or in court.  But this time the Jeffersonians were determined to bring the full weight of their political power to bear. Harry’s defense lawyers requested copies of the indictments; denied. They requested a delay to bring James Callender up from Virginia, to testify; denied. They requested a change of venue; denied. 

After six months of denials, the case was finally went to the jury, and imperious Chief Justice Morgan Lewis’ (above) instructions sealed Harry’s fate. “The law is settled", said Justice Lewis. "The truth of the matter published cannot be given in evidence.”

This was old English Common Law, the standard still in use in the America. And under its rules, the jury retired at sunset, and at 8 A.M. the next morning convicted Harry Coswell.  His lawyers immediately filed an appeal for a new trial, and while that was heard, at least Harry was out of jail. 

That did not seem to help much because over the summer his primary witness for the defense, James Callender, scorned confidant of Thomas Jefferson, and life-long alcoholic, fell into mud flats along the James River in Richmond, and drowned.

Speaking for Harry's defense before the New York state Supreme Court, on 13 February, 1804, was Jefferson's nemeses, Alexander Hamilton himself. He argued that the only restraint on publishers should reside not with the government and politicians, but with the “occasional and fluctuating group of common citizens” sitting on juries. Only if a charge was untrue, and only if the writer had reason to know it was untrue, should it be considered slander or libel; or so argued Alexander Hamilton.

Amazingly the New York State Supreme Court agreed. They overturned Harry’s conviction and ordered a new trial. But by then the political winds had shifted. Public opinion had not taken kindly to Republican politicians arguing they should be exempt from public criticism. The New York Legislature even re-wrote their libel and slander laws. But, Thomas Jefferson as not willing to take "no" for an answer, and Harry was brought up on new charges. And he was convicted again. But this time the jury awarded the plaintiff exactly six cents, which wasn’t a lot of money, even in 1804.

Harry Croswell was now made senior editor of "The Balance". But the fire had also gone out of the Federalists cause, and the paper foundered financially. In 1811, having served a short term in debtor’s prison, 

Harry Crosswell (above) not only quickly moved beyond the reach of the New York courts , but he also retired from politics. He never even voted again. Instead, he became an Episcopal Minister and eventually was assigned to the Trinity Church in New Haven, Connecticut. He preached there for 43 years. Said one of his flock of the man, “He was not a great preacher, but he had an extraordinary knowledge of human nature, and could ingratiate himself into every man's heart.”

Thus, having applied his talents in a more productive way than politics, Harry Crosswell,  died on 13 March , 1858, at 80 years old.  His life could be divided in two. In the first phrase, he made history. In the second phrase, he made a real difference in people's lives.

- 30 -

THE ODD LITTLE PREACHER

 

I do not believe the Reverend Kelly. But I am not sure if I don’t believe him when he said murdered an entire family, or when he said he didn't.  What I do know is that five years later, passengers on the Monday morning westbound number 5 train remembered the twitchy, diminutive preacher telling his fellow bleary eyed travelers that he had just left eight butchered bodies back in Villisca, Iowa. 

The bodies would not be discovered until almost three hours later. So if the sleepy witnesses remembered the unspeakable horror described by a strange little preacher they had never seen before, or since, then he was guilty of 8 grisly murders. But, no passengers at the time repeated such a tale. And why would they keep it a secrete if they heard it?  But either way, the Reverend George Kelly was crazy as a loon.

Villisca Iowa is a self proclaimed “community of pride where the rivers divide”,  the rivers being the West and Middle branches of the Nordaway. 

Villsaca lies 80 miles southwest of Council Bluffs.  Montgomery County was settled in the mid 19th century,  mostly by people from upstate New York and Pennsylvania, people with names like Bates and Bowman, Kennedy and Hoover, Powers and Preston and Wymore. 

They arrived on the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy railroad, called by her customers just “The Q”.  At the time no community in Iowa was more than a few miles from an active rail line. Most of the residents of Villisca either sold services or equipment to the local farmers or worked for the railroad. And in 1912 the little town contained about 2,000 souls.

On the morning of Monday, 10 June, 1912,  inside a sad looking two story house (now at 323 East 4th.Street) were found the bodies of Mr. Josiah B. Moore, his wife Sara, their daughter Katherine and their sons Herman, Boyd and Paul, as well as the bodies of their overnight child guests, Lena and Ina Stillinger. The children were aged 5 through 12. 

All of the Moore family (above) were found in their beds, with their heads covered by bedclothes. All of their skulls had been battered 20 to 30 times with the blunt end of an ax, which was found wiped clean in the downstairs sewing room/bedroom,  along with the bodies of the Stillinger girls.

The ceilings in the parent's bedroom (above) and the children's room upstairs showed gouge marks, apparently made by the upswing of the ax blade

Downstairs Lena Stillinger’s (above, left) nightgown was pushed up, leaving her genitalia exposed. But the doctors said there was no evidence of molestation. There was an odd bloodstain on her knee and an alleged defensive wound on her arm.  A two pound slab of bacon was found, wrapped in a dishtowel, on the downstairs bedroom floor. 

On the kitchen table (above, right) was a plate of uneaten food and a bowl of bloody water. The medical estimate was that all of the murders had occurred shortly after midnight, the Monday morning of 10 June, 1912.

On Tuesday, 11 June, 1912,  Mr. Sam Moyer was arrested for the murders.  He was released on Saturday, 15 June.  On Thursday,  20 June, 1912  Mr. John Bohland was arrested for the murders. He was released a few days later.  

On 5 July, 1912, Mr. Frank Roberts (“a negro”) was arrested for the murders. He was released a few days after that. On 28 December, farmer and the ex-brother-in-law to victim Sara Moore,  Mr. Lew Van Alstine, was arrested for the murders. He was released a few weeks later. On 15 July, 1916,  Mr. William Mansfield was arrested for the murders. On 21 July,  he was released.  And for the next five years that was where the investigation ended. 

On 19 March, 1917, five years after the murders, the Reverend J.J. Burris told a Grand Jury sitting in the county seat of Red Oak, that a mystery man had confessed on his death bed to having committed the murders.  And finally, on 30 April, 1917,  a warrant for the arrest of the Reverend George Kelly was issued. He arrived to surrender himself two weeks later, oddly enough on the Number 5 train.

The authorities first became interested in the Reverend (above, on the right) a few weeks after the murders, alerted by local recipients of his rambling letters. He had arrived in Villisca for the first time the Sunday morning before the murders, and had attended a Sunday school performance by the Stillinger girls. He had left Villisca the following day, Monday morning on that Number 5 train..

Two weeks later he had returned,  posing as a detective, and had even joined a tour of the murder house with a group of real investigators (above).  There was virtually no control of the crime scene. The only thing stopping police from arresting George Kelly immediately was that it was abundantly clear the Reverend was absolutely crazy.

Lyn George Jacklin Kelly (above left, again with his wife) was the son and the grandson of English ministers, It was known that, as an adolescent, had suffered a “mental breakdown”.  He had immigrated to America with his wife in 1904 and preached at a dozen Methodist churches across North Dakota, Minnesota, Kansas and Iowa. Preaching from the pulpit he was a “...a confident, well-versed, and articulate speaker”.  But in personal interactions the 5 foot, 119 pound minister displayed “...a nervous demeanor, shifty eyes, and often spoke so quickly that saliva would dribble down his chin”.He had been assigned as a visiting minister to several small communities north of Villisca, where  he developed a reputation for odd behavior; late night walks, rumors that he was a peeping tom and unconfirmed stories that he had tried to convince young girls to undress for him.  In 1914, while preaching in South Dakota,  he had advertised (above)  for a private secretary. One young woman who responded was informed by return post that Kelly wanted her to type in the nude .  He was convicted of sending obscene material through the mail, and spent more time in a mental hospital.  While there he wrote to the Montgomery County D.A. that he expected at any moment to be arrested for the Villisca murders.

Finally, after investigating just about every other possibility, the Grand Jury indicted Kelly for the murder of Lena Stillinger.  All through the summer of 1917, while in jail awaiting trial, Kelly was interrogated.

The last interview was on 30 August,  a marathon session that lasted all night (above) .  At 7AM on the morning of the 31 August, 1917,  Kelly signed a confession to the murder, saying God had whispered to him to “suffer the children to come unto me.”

At trial the Reverend Kelly recanted his confession, and on Wednesday, 26 September 1917 the case went to the jury, which deadlocked eleven to one for acquittal.

A second jury was immediately empaneled, and in November the Reverend Kelly was acquitted by all 12 jurors. No one else was ever tried for the murders. And the crime remains one of the most horrific, unsolved mass murders in American history, known simply as the Villisca Axe Murders.Did he do it?  I don't know. The passengers on the number 5 train that Monday morning in 1912, were pretty certain in 1917 that the Reverend Kelly had confessed to them, three hours before the bodies were discovered. But did they really remember the confession, five years later? Was it really the morning of the murders? Or had it happened two weeks later,  when Reverend Kelly had impersonated a detective, and returned to the scene of the crime, and then boarded the same Number 5 train ? It is enough to shake your faith in any certainty in this world. ( http://www.villiscaiowa.com/).  

- 30 -

LOVE AND A CLIP JOINT

 

I am certain William Johnson believed he was dying in the name of love. And maybe he was. The object of his passion, Mrs. Jane Housden, may have believed the same thing. The official record tells us merely that this criminal Romeo and Juliet were charged with the murder of an innocent man in open court - something you don't see very often. So when you do, it inspires contemplation -  which follows.

The year was 1714, and the place was London. To describe life in this age as brutal and short is accurate, but a bit misleading. Average life expectancy was under 40 years of age, but that was because 12% of all children died before their first birthday. 

If you made it to thirty years of age in 1714 you could expect to live to be sixty, unless you lived in Newport Market section of London, where the overcrowding and lack of sanitation almost guaranteed you would still be dead by forty. But if you made it to sixty, even in Newport Market, you could expect to live till you were 72. There just weren’t very many who made it to sixty.

William Johnson (aka William Holloway) had been born in Newport Market. He was apprenticed as butcher (above), and then, because of his brains, became a surgeon’s assistant. 

By the age of 33 William's ambition moved him into the profession of footpath -  a thief who waylaid fellow pedestrians at gunpoint and robbed them. But William was known to have badly beaten several of his victims, and was suspected in at least two murders. Which may be why William also had the ambition to be a highwayman. With a horse he could make a quicker escape. But for that he would need a horse. And, alas, William fell victim to his ambitions.

 Early in 1710 he stole a bay gelding, the property of Mr. Evelyn Pierrpoint, a member of the peerage and a leader in the House of Lords. Pierpont was very popular in upper crust social circles, and closely tied to the crown. Being thus connected, this theft of his horse was investigated with zeal, and it was not long before William was suspected and incarcerated for the theft.

It was not unusual for convicted thieves to be condemned to death, and on 4 June, 1711, in the Old Bailey Courthouse, William was so convicted. But because he plead guilty his sentence was commuted to transportation to America. Five weeks later, while William was confined in the pestilent Newgate prison (above) awaiting shipment, he escaped. It was a singular achievement and as such it was a further insult to the honor of the upper crust that resulted in the arrest of William’s own lady love, Jane Housden, charged with her third “coining” offense.

At the other end of the criminal hierarchy from highwaymen were clippers. In a world without paper currency, every coin was literally worth its weight in silver or gold. In England the basic unit of currency was the “Pound Sterling”, which was minted from 16 ounces of real silver. This meant that merchants could short change their customers with the simple application of a metal file. Many “honest” shopkeepers rented out their cash boxes overnight to clippers, and many a shop’s customers found their change shaved of 2 or 3% of its face value, thus inspiring the descriptive phrase, “a clip joint” as a shop where you were cheated. This was the reason coins came with a date stamped on them. The longer a coin was in circulation the less reliable was its face value.

In the 1690’s the English Secretary to the Treasury, Mr. William Lowndes, wrote “it is a thing so easy…even women and children…are capable of the act.” The act was filing off silver from a coin, melting the filings and pouring them into a counterfeit mold. It was not uncommon for a raiding constable to discover “a woman sitting beside the fire finishing a pile of counterfeits with a knife and file, while her husband occupied himself with...other coining tools.” It was estimated at the time that a pair of crooks …could produce twenty-five pounds of silver filings in a day - and this when a family could live quite comfortably on fifty Pounds a year.

Mrs. Jane Housden (aka Jane Newsted) had been arrested in 1701 for “coining”, and given a pardon. She was arrested again on 9 September, 1710, and pardoned again on 6 June. But officials then had warned that that if she were arrested a third time for the same offense, there would be no pardon; which made it very serious when Jane was arrested once again on 13 August, 1714. I suspect that this time Jane’s arrest was part of a trap. From informers the authorities knew that Jane had often alerted William to wealthy travelers. (about 20% of all women in London worked at least part time as prostitutes.)  And they knew that Jane was William’s mistress. A warrant had been prepared in advance for William’s arrest, signed by Lord Chief Justice Parker, himself, just in case William should appear at Jane's trial.

The date was Wednesday, 10 September, 1714.  Driven by passion and or love William slipped into the central court room at the Old Bailey with two loaded pistols in his coat pocket. He waited by “Door at the hole”, where under guard, visitors were allowed to pass food, drink and money to prisoners waiting in the docket. He managed but a few whispered words with his Jane before a constable and a turnkey came forward to arrest him..

The instant they attempted to clap him in handcuffs, William drew a pistol. The turnkey leapt upon him, knocking the gun from his hand. Both men tumbled to the floor, the turnkey knocked silly. Jane seized the weapon, but another constable knocked her to the ground. Enraged, William fought to his feet, and leveled the second weapon. The constable jerked William’s arm up and drove a shoulder into his waist, as the head turnkey, Richard Spurling, raced forward to help. In the struggle, the gun went off, firing over the Constable’s head, but striking Mr. Spurling in the chest (above), killing him instantly.

The judges, shocked at the interruption, decided there was no point in continuing Jane’s trial for coining, and immediately tried her and William for the murder of poor Mr. Spurling,  A jury made up of witnesses to the murder was impaneled. The case was argued by other witnesses to the murder. The verdict was guilty for both defendants, delivered by even more witnesses to the murder. The punishment was set by yet a third group of witnesses to the murder, as death -  all while the corpus delicti was still warm. It had been a singular day in the Old Baily.

This time there was no pardon and no escape. At 9:00 on the morning of 19 September, 1714, William and Jane were loaded into a cart along with their hangman and the prison chaplain. Lead by constables and followed by a squad of soldiers, the sad procession passed up Holborn Street, then St. Giles Road, to Tyburn Road (now Oxford Street), with several stops along the way at pubs where the condemned were encouraged to imbibe. Finally they reached the traditional site of execution, where a large crowd waited, at a spot where there once had stood a tree.

As the old poem went, “I have heard sundry men oft times dispute, Of trees, that in one year will twice bear fruit. But if a man note Tyburn, 'will appear, That there’s a tree that bears twelve times a year.” And there, from a rude gibbet, a rough wooden beam, William and Jane, hopefully blind drunk, danced together at the end of their ropes. The prison chaplain read Pslam 51 3; “For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.” There was very little comfort in that passage, but then comfort was not the point.

The sin, in this particular case, was that William Holloway had murdered a man in open court, in front of witnesses, and Jane Housden had been foolish enough to love him. They were both sins that were to be repeated untold times over the next 300 years, and probably for another 300 after this.

- 30 -