NOTES.

NOTES.51Even Winthrop, the governor of Massachusetts, wise and good as he was, recorded in hisHistoryhis direful forebodings occasioned by the appearance of a monstrosity which the unfortunate Mary Dyer, who was afterwards hanged as a Quaker, had brought into the world.History of New England, i. 261–3.52Demonologie, in forme of a dialogue, 1st Ed., Edinburgh, 1597, 4to.531 Jac. I. c. 12.54State Trials, vol. ii. pp. 786–862.55Baxter, Richard, D. D.,The Certainty of the Worlds of Spirits, p. 53.56A Tryal of Witches, printed 1682, published with a treatise of Sir Matthew Hale’s onSheriffs’ Accompts, London, 1683. Sir Matthew’s charge was to the following effect: “That he would not repeat the Evidence unto them, least by so doing he should wrong the Evidence on the one side or on the other. Only this acquainted them, That they had Two things to enquire after.First, whether or no these children were bewitched?Secondly, whether the Prisoners at the Bar were Guilty of it. That there were such Creatures as Witches he made no doubt at all; For,First, the Scriptures had affirmed so much.Secondly, The Wisdom of all Nations had provided laws against such persons, which is an argument of their confidence in such a Crime. And such hath been the judgment of this Kingdom, as appears by that Act of Parliament which hath provided Punishments proportionable to the quality of the offense. And desired them strictly to observe their Evidence; and desired the great God of Heaven to direct their Hearts in this weighty thing they had in hand: For to condemn the Innocent, and to let the Guilty go free, were both an abomination unto the Lord.” (pp. 55, 56.)57A Tryal of Witches, pp. 41, 42.58Winthrop, ii. 307. Stiles,Ancient Windsor, i. 447.59Winthrop, ii. 326. Hutchinson,Hist. of Massachusets-Bay(London, 1765–1768), i. 150.Mass. Rec., ii. 242, iii. 126, seems to refer to this case, though no names are given.60Mather, Cotton,Late Memorable Providences, pp. 62–65.Magnalia, Book vi. ch. 7.61W. S. Poole, inMemorial History of Boston, ii. 133 note. Hutchinson, ii. 10.62Mass. Rec., iv. (1), 47, 48.63Mass. Rec., i. (1), 96.64Conn. Colonial Records, i. 220;cf.New Haven Col. Rec., ii. 78.65History of Hartford County (Conn.), Sketch of Wethersfield, by S. Adams.66New Haven Col. Rec., ii. 78. Lydia Gilbert, of Windsor, was indicted for witchcraft, March 24th, 1653–4, but there is no record of the issue of her trial. Stiles,Ancient Windsor, i. 449, 450.67Mass. Records, iv. (1), 269.68Hutchinson, i. 187, 188.69Conn. Col. Rec., i. 573. Mather,Remarkable Providences, 139. Walker, Geo. Leon, D. D.,History of the First Church in Hartford. Hutchinson, ii. 16, 17.70Judd,History of Hadley, 233.Conn. Col. Rec., ii. 172. For her subsequent troubles in N. Y.,Documentary Hist. of N.Y., iv. 87.71Calef,More Wonders of the Invisible World.Conn. Col. Rec., iii. p. v. and 76, 77note.72Hutchinson, ii. p. 18. “But in 1685, a very circumstantial account of all or most of the cases I have mentioned was published, and many arguments were brought to convince the country that they were no delusions nor impostures, but the effects of a familiarity between the devil and such as he found fit for his instruments.”73A Tryal of Witches, London, 1682.74Horneck, in Glanvil’sSaducismus Triumphatus, London, 1681.75It will be remembered, that much against the will of the Puritan leaders, they had been compelled by the royal authority to allow the use of the service of the Church of England, which they and their friends in England had fancied some years before that they had destroyed. For a similar instance of combined bigotry and superstition,cf.Winthrop’s history of the mice and the Prayer Books.Hist. of New England, ii. 20.76Mather, Cotton, D. D.,Late Memorable Providences.Magnalia Christi, Book vi. ch. 8. Hutchinson, ii. 20.77Late Memorable Providences, London, 1691; 2d Impression. Calef,More Wonders of the Invisible World, postscript.78Calef,More Wonders, p. 90. Hutchinson, ii. 11. Upham,The Salem Witchcraft.79Brattle,Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, v. 62, 70, 71. The way in which Parris conducted the investigations may be seen from the following extracts from the examination of Elizabeth How, May 31st, 1692:“Mercy Lewis and Mary Walcot fell in a fit quickly after the examinant came in. Mary Walcot said that this woman the examinant had pincht her & choakt this mouth. Ann Putnam said that she had hurt her three times.What say you to this charge? Here are three that charge you with witchcraft.If it was the last moment I was to live, God knows I am innocent of anything in this nature.Did you not take notice that now when you lookt upon Mercy Lewis she was struck down?I cannot help it.You are charged here. What doe you say?I am innocent of anything of this nature.Is this the first time that ever you were accused?Yes, Sir.Do you not know that one at Ipswich hath accused you?This is the first time that ever I heard of it.You say that you never heard of these folks before.Mercy Lewis at length spake and charged this woman of with hurting and pinching her.And then Abigail Williams cryed she hath hurt me a great many times, a great while & she hath brought me the book.Ann Putnam had a pin stuck in her hand. What do you say to this?I cannot help it.What consent have you given?Mercy Warren cryed out she was prickt & great prints were seen in her arms.Have you not seen some apparition?No, never in all my life.Those that have confessed they tell us they used images and pins, now tell us what you have used.You would not have me confess that which I know not.She lookt upon Mary Warren & said Warren violently fell down.Look upon this maid viz: Mary Walcot, her back being towards the Examinant.Mary Warren and Ann Putnam said they saw this woman upon her. Susan Sheldon saith this was the woman that carryed her yesterday to the Pond. Sus. Sheldon carried to the examinant in a fit & was well upon grasping her arm.You said you never heard before of these people.Not before the warrant was served upon me last Sabbath day.John Indian cryed out Oh she bites & fell into a grievous fit & so carried to her in his fit, & was well upon her grasping him.What do you say to these things? they cannot come to you.I am not able to give account of it.Cannot you tell what keeps them off from your body?I cannot tell, I know not what it is.That is strange that you should do these things & not be able to tell how.This is a true copy of the examination of Eliz. How taken from my characters written at the time thereof.Witness my handSam. Parris.”Woodward,Records of Salem Witchcraft, II., 69–94.80Brattle,ut supra, 65, 72, 78.81This confession is cited from Hutchinson,History of Massachusets-Bay, ii. pp. 31–33.82This was the commonly received opinion, and though opposed by Increase Mather, was much insisted on by Stoughton, the lieutenant-governor, and proved the destruction of many; as, if an innocent person could not be personated, it followed that those who were accused by the possessed were certainly guilty.Cf.Brattle,Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, vol. v. 61 ff., on spectral evidence, and the bigotry and unfairness of Stoughton. Increase Mather,Some Cases of Conscience concerning Evil Spirits.83Hutchinson, ii. 49. Mather, Cotton,Wonders of the Invisible World, 65–70.84It is interesting, though painful, to find as a prominent witness against Bishop, one Samuel Shattuck, the son of the Quaker who, thirty years before, had delivered to Endicott the order from Charles II. which had freed himself and his friends from the extremes of Puritan cruelty.85Mather, Increase, D. D.,Cases of Conscience concerning Evil Spirits, Postscript.86Calef,More Wonders of the Invisible World.87Brattle,Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, v. 66, 67. The case of Elizabeth How, mentioned above, is a good example of the way in which neighborhood quarrels and church quarrels were dragged in. She had had a falling out with a family by the name of Perley some two years before, and they now came forward with depositions that she had bewitched their cows so that they gave no milk, and one of their children so that it pined away. “After this,” swears Samuel Perley, “the abovesaid goode how had a mind to ioyn to ipswich church thai being unsatisfied sent to us to bring in what we had against her and when we had declared to them what we knew thai see cause to Put a stop to her coming into the church. Within a few dais after I had a cow wel in the morning as far as we knew this cow was taken strangli runing about like a mad thing a litle while and then run into a great Pon and drowned herself and as sone as she was dead mi sons and miself towed her to the shore, and she stunk so that we had much a doe to flea her.”The ministers of Rowley investigated the case of the Perley child, and were evidently convinced that the parents had put the idea into the child’s head, and gave plain testimony to that effect, and several neighbors came forward with testimony to the prisoner’s good character. But a fresh collection of marvels was adduced by a family of the name of Comins or Cummins who accused her of bewitching their horses, and other neighbors, not to be outdone, testified to other strange occurrences, and the court condemned her and she was executed on the sixteenth of July. She was, however, only convicted upon the evidence obtained in Parris’s investigation, though the testimony of her Ipswich neighbors undoubtedly had great weight with the jury. The other trials are of much the same character, some revealing a most fiendish animosity on the part of neighbors or relatives, and leaving a very painful impression of the condition of country life in New England at that time. For testimony as to the cowardice of friends and neighbors and the confessions extorted from weak-minded persons, see letter of Francis Dane, Sen.; Woodward,Records, II., 66–68.88Brattle,ut supra68, 69.89Drake,Annals of Witchcraft, 193.90Increase Mather says: “InDecemberthe court sat again atSaleminNew England, and cleared about 40 persons suspected for witches, and condemned three. The evidence against these was the same as formerly, so the Warrant for their Execution was sent, and theGraves diggedfor the said three, and for about five more that had been condemned atSalemformerly, but were Repreived by the Governour.In the beginning ofFebruary, 1693, the Court sate at Charlestown, where the Judge exprest himself to this effect.That who it was that obstructed the Execution of Justice, or hindered those good proceedings they had made, he knew not, but thereby the Kingdom of Satan was advanc’d, etc. and the Lord have mercy on this Country; and so declined coming any more into Court. In his absence Mr. D—— sate as Chief Judge 3 several days, in which time 5 or 6 were cleared by Proclamation, and almost as many by Trial; so that all were acquitted....So that by theGoodness of Godwe are once more out of present danger of this Hobgoblin monster; the standing evidence used atSalemwere called, but did not appear.There were others also at Charlestown brought upon their Tryals, who had formerly confessed themselves to be witches; but upon their Tryals deny’d it; and were all cleared; So that at present there is nofurther prosecution of any.”A Further Account of the Tryals, London, 1693, p. 10.The court apparently met December 31st, and sat into January, which would account for the apparent discrepancy in regard to the time of its session.91The authorities were accused of great partiality in allowing, in several cases, persons accused by the afflicted to escape, when they were either related to them or their personal friends. Brattle, pp. 69, 70.92Calef,More Wonders, p. 144.93Calef, p. 144. Hutchinson, ii. 61.94Calef, pp. 55–64.95Smith,History of Delaware County, 152, 153.96Documentary History of the State of New York, iv. 85–88.97Barber,Historical Collections, Virginia, 436–438.98Hutchinson, ii. 62.99Calef, p. 105. Brattle,as above, pp. 72, 78.100Hutchinson, ii. 22.101Brattle,as above, p. 75.

51Even Winthrop, the governor of Massachusetts, wise and good as he was, recorded in hisHistoryhis direful forebodings occasioned by the appearance of a monstrosity which the unfortunate Mary Dyer, who was afterwards hanged as a Quaker, had brought into the world.History of New England, i. 261–3.

52Demonologie, in forme of a dialogue, 1st Ed., Edinburgh, 1597, 4to.

531 Jac. I. c. 12.

54State Trials, vol. ii. pp. 786–862.

55Baxter, Richard, D. D.,The Certainty of the Worlds of Spirits, p. 53.

56A Tryal of Witches, printed 1682, published with a treatise of Sir Matthew Hale’s onSheriffs’ Accompts, London, 1683. Sir Matthew’s charge was to the following effect: “That he would not repeat the Evidence unto them, least by so doing he should wrong the Evidence on the one side or on the other. Only this acquainted them, That they had Two things to enquire after.First, whether or no these children were bewitched?Secondly, whether the Prisoners at the Bar were Guilty of it. That there were such Creatures as Witches he made no doubt at all; For,First, the Scriptures had affirmed so much.Secondly, The Wisdom of all Nations had provided laws against such persons, which is an argument of their confidence in such a Crime. And such hath been the judgment of this Kingdom, as appears by that Act of Parliament which hath provided Punishments proportionable to the quality of the offense. And desired them strictly to observe their Evidence; and desired the great God of Heaven to direct their Hearts in this weighty thing they had in hand: For to condemn the Innocent, and to let the Guilty go free, were both an abomination unto the Lord.” (pp. 55, 56.)

57A Tryal of Witches, pp. 41, 42.

58Winthrop, ii. 307. Stiles,Ancient Windsor, i. 447.

59Winthrop, ii. 326. Hutchinson,Hist. of Massachusets-Bay(London, 1765–1768), i. 150.Mass. Rec., ii. 242, iii. 126, seems to refer to this case, though no names are given.

60Mather, Cotton,Late Memorable Providences, pp. 62–65.Magnalia, Book vi. ch. 7.

61W. S. Poole, inMemorial History of Boston, ii. 133 note. Hutchinson, ii. 10.

62Mass. Rec., iv. (1), 47, 48.

63Mass. Rec., i. (1), 96.

64Conn. Colonial Records, i. 220;cf.New Haven Col. Rec., ii. 78.

65History of Hartford County (Conn.), Sketch of Wethersfield, by S. Adams.

66New Haven Col. Rec., ii. 78. Lydia Gilbert, of Windsor, was indicted for witchcraft, March 24th, 1653–4, but there is no record of the issue of her trial. Stiles,Ancient Windsor, i. 449, 450.

67Mass. Records, iv. (1), 269.

68Hutchinson, i. 187, 188.

69Conn. Col. Rec., i. 573. Mather,Remarkable Providences, 139. Walker, Geo. Leon, D. D.,History of the First Church in Hartford. Hutchinson, ii. 16, 17.

70Judd,History of Hadley, 233.Conn. Col. Rec., ii. 172. For her subsequent troubles in N. Y.,Documentary Hist. of N.Y., iv. 87.

71Calef,More Wonders of the Invisible World.Conn. Col. Rec., iii. p. v. and 76, 77note.

72Hutchinson, ii. p. 18. “But in 1685, a very circumstantial account of all or most of the cases I have mentioned was published, and many arguments were brought to convince the country that they were no delusions nor impostures, but the effects of a familiarity between the devil and such as he found fit for his instruments.”

73A Tryal of Witches, London, 1682.

74Horneck, in Glanvil’sSaducismus Triumphatus, London, 1681.

75It will be remembered, that much against the will of the Puritan leaders, they had been compelled by the royal authority to allow the use of the service of the Church of England, which they and their friends in England had fancied some years before that they had destroyed. For a similar instance of combined bigotry and superstition,cf.Winthrop’s history of the mice and the Prayer Books.Hist. of New England, ii. 20.

76Mather, Cotton, D. D.,Late Memorable Providences.Magnalia Christi, Book vi. ch. 8. Hutchinson, ii. 20.

77Late Memorable Providences, London, 1691; 2d Impression. Calef,More Wonders of the Invisible World, postscript.

78Calef,More Wonders, p. 90. Hutchinson, ii. 11. Upham,The Salem Witchcraft.

79Brattle,Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, v. 62, 70, 71. The way in which Parris conducted the investigations may be seen from the following extracts from the examination of Elizabeth How, May 31st, 1692:“Mercy Lewis and Mary Walcot fell in a fit quickly after the examinant came in. Mary Walcot said that this woman the examinant had pincht her & choakt this mouth. Ann Putnam said that she had hurt her three times.What say you to this charge? Here are three that charge you with witchcraft.If it was the last moment I was to live, God knows I am innocent of anything in this nature.Did you not take notice that now when you lookt upon Mercy Lewis she was struck down?I cannot help it.You are charged here. What doe you say?I am innocent of anything of this nature.Is this the first time that ever you were accused?Yes, Sir.Do you not know that one at Ipswich hath accused you?This is the first time that ever I heard of it.You say that you never heard of these folks before.Mercy Lewis at length spake and charged this woman of with hurting and pinching her.And then Abigail Williams cryed she hath hurt me a great many times, a great while & she hath brought me the book.Ann Putnam had a pin stuck in her hand. What do you say to this?I cannot help it.What consent have you given?Mercy Warren cryed out she was prickt & great prints were seen in her arms.Have you not seen some apparition?No, never in all my life.Those that have confessed they tell us they used images and pins, now tell us what you have used.You would not have me confess that which I know not.She lookt upon Mary Warren & said Warren violently fell down.Look upon this maid viz: Mary Walcot, her back being towards the Examinant.Mary Warren and Ann Putnam said they saw this woman upon her. Susan Sheldon saith this was the woman that carryed her yesterday to the Pond. Sus. Sheldon carried to the examinant in a fit & was well upon grasping her arm.You said you never heard before of these people.Not before the warrant was served upon me last Sabbath day.John Indian cryed out Oh she bites & fell into a grievous fit & so carried to her in his fit, & was well upon her grasping him.What do you say to these things? they cannot come to you.I am not able to give account of it.Cannot you tell what keeps them off from your body?I cannot tell, I know not what it is.That is strange that you should do these things & not be able to tell how.This is a true copy of the examination of Eliz. How taken from my characters written at the time thereof.Witness my handSam. Parris.”Woodward,Records of Salem Witchcraft, II., 69–94.

“Mercy Lewis and Mary Walcot fell in a fit quickly after the examinant came in. Mary Walcot said that this woman the examinant had pincht her & choakt this mouth. Ann Putnam said that she had hurt her three times.

What say you to this charge? Here are three that charge you with witchcraft.

If it was the last moment I was to live, God knows I am innocent of anything in this nature.

Did you not take notice that now when you lookt upon Mercy Lewis she was struck down?

I cannot help it.

You are charged here. What doe you say?

I am innocent of anything of this nature.

Is this the first time that ever you were accused?

Yes, Sir.

Do you not know that one at Ipswich hath accused you?

This is the first time that ever I heard of it.

You say that you never heard of these folks before.

Mercy Lewis at length spake and charged this woman of with hurting and pinching her.

And then Abigail Williams cryed she hath hurt me a great many times, a great while & she hath brought me the book.

Ann Putnam had a pin stuck in her hand. What do you say to this?

I cannot help it.

What consent have you given?

Mercy Warren cryed out she was prickt & great prints were seen in her arms.

Have you not seen some apparition?

No, never in all my life.

Those that have confessed they tell us they used images and pins, now tell us what you have used.

You would not have me confess that which I know not.

She lookt upon Mary Warren & said Warren violently fell down.

Look upon this maid viz: Mary Walcot, her back being towards the Examinant.

Mary Warren and Ann Putnam said they saw this woman upon her. Susan Sheldon saith this was the woman that carryed her yesterday to the Pond. Sus. Sheldon carried to the examinant in a fit & was well upon grasping her arm.

You said you never heard before of these people.

Not before the warrant was served upon me last Sabbath day.

John Indian cryed out Oh she bites & fell into a grievous fit & so carried to her in his fit, & was well upon her grasping him.

What do you say to these things? they cannot come to you.

I am not able to give account of it.

Cannot you tell what keeps them off from your body?

I cannot tell, I know not what it is.

That is strange that you should do these things & not be able to tell how.

This is a true copy of the examination of Eliz. How taken from my characters written at the time thereof.

Witness my handSam. Parris.”

Woodward,Records of Salem Witchcraft, II., 69–94.

80Brattle,ut supra, 65, 72, 78.

81This confession is cited from Hutchinson,History of Massachusets-Bay, ii. pp. 31–33.

82This was the commonly received opinion, and though opposed by Increase Mather, was much insisted on by Stoughton, the lieutenant-governor, and proved the destruction of many; as, if an innocent person could not be personated, it followed that those who were accused by the possessed were certainly guilty.Cf.Brattle,Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, vol. v. 61 ff., on spectral evidence, and the bigotry and unfairness of Stoughton. Increase Mather,Some Cases of Conscience concerning Evil Spirits.

83Hutchinson, ii. 49. Mather, Cotton,Wonders of the Invisible World, 65–70.

84It is interesting, though painful, to find as a prominent witness against Bishop, one Samuel Shattuck, the son of the Quaker who, thirty years before, had delivered to Endicott the order from Charles II. which had freed himself and his friends from the extremes of Puritan cruelty.

85Mather, Increase, D. D.,Cases of Conscience concerning Evil Spirits, Postscript.

86Calef,More Wonders of the Invisible World.

87Brattle,Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, v. 66, 67. The case of Elizabeth How, mentioned above, is a good example of the way in which neighborhood quarrels and church quarrels were dragged in. She had had a falling out with a family by the name of Perley some two years before, and they now came forward with depositions that she had bewitched their cows so that they gave no milk, and one of their children so that it pined away. “After this,” swears Samuel Perley, “the abovesaid goode how had a mind to ioyn to ipswich church thai being unsatisfied sent to us to bring in what we had against her and when we had declared to them what we knew thai see cause to Put a stop to her coming into the church. Within a few dais after I had a cow wel in the morning as far as we knew this cow was taken strangli runing about like a mad thing a litle while and then run into a great Pon and drowned herself and as sone as she was dead mi sons and miself towed her to the shore, and she stunk so that we had much a doe to flea her.”The ministers of Rowley investigated the case of the Perley child, and were evidently convinced that the parents had put the idea into the child’s head, and gave plain testimony to that effect, and several neighbors came forward with testimony to the prisoner’s good character. But a fresh collection of marvels was adduced by a family of the name of Comins or Cummins who accused her of bewitching their horses, and other neighbors, not to be outdone, testified to other strange occurrences, and the court condemned her and she was executed on the sixteenth of July. She was, however, only convicted upon the evidence obtained in Parris’s investigation, though the testimony of her Ipswich neighbors undoubtedly had great weight with the jury. The other trials are of much the same character, some revealing a most fiendish animosity on the part of neighbors or relatives, and leaving a very painful impression of the condition of country life in New England at that time. For testimony as to the cowardice of friends and neighbors and the confessions extorted from weak-minded persons, see letter of Francis Dane, Sen.; Woodward,Records, II., 66–68.

The ministers of Rowley investigated the case of the Perley child, and were evidently convinced that the parents had put the idea into the child’s head, and gave plain testimony to that effect, and several neighbors came forward with testimony to the prisoner’s good character. But a fresh collection of marvels was adduced by a family of the name of Comins or Cummins who accused her of bewitching their horses, and other neighbors, not to be outdone, testified to other strange occurrences, and the court condemned her and she was executed on the sixteenth of July. She was, however, only convicted upon the evidence obtained in Parris’s investigation, though the testimony of her Ipswich neighbors undoubtedly had great weight with the jury. The other trials are of much the same character, some revealing a most fiendish animosity on the part of neighbors or relatives, and leaving a very painful impression of the condition of country life in New England at that time. For testimony as to the cowardice of friends and neighbors and the confessions extorted from weak-minded persons, see letter of Francis Dane, Sen.; Woodward,Records, II., 66–68.

88Brattle,ut supra68, 69.

89Drake,Annals of Witchcraft, 193.

90Increase Mather says: “InDecemberthe court sat again atSaleminNew England, and cleared about 40 persons suspected for witches, and condemned three. The evidence against these was the same as formerly, so the Warrant for their Execution was sent, and theGraves diggedfor the said three, and for about five more that had been condemned atSalemformerly, but were Repreived by the Governour.In the beginning ofFebruary, 1693, the Court sate at Charlestown, where the Judge exprest himself to this effect.That who it was that obstructed the Execution of Justice, or hindered those good proceedings they had made, he knew not, but thereby the Kingdom of Satan was advanc’d, etc. and the Lord have mercy on this Country; and so declined coming any more into Court. In his absence Mr. D—— sate as Chief Judge 3 several days, in which time 5 or 6 were cleared by Proclamation, and almost as many by Trial; so that all were acquitted....So that by theGoodness of Godwe are once more out of present danger of this Hobgoblin monster; the standing evidence used atSalemwere called, but did not appear.There were others also at Charlestown brought upon their Tryals, who had formerly confessed themselves to be witches; but upon their Tryals deny’d it; and were all cleared; So that at present there is nofurther prosecution of any.”A Further Account of the Tryals, London, 1693, p. 10.The court apparently met December 31st, and sat into January, which would account for the apparent discrepancy in regard to the time of its session.

In the beginning ofFebruary, 1693, the Court sate at Charlestown, where the Judge exprest himself to this effect.That who it was that obstructed the Execution of Justice, or hindered those good proceedings they had made, he knew not, but thereby the Kingdom of Satan was advanc’d, etc. and the Lord have mercy on this Country; and so declined coming any more into Court. In his absence Mr. D—— sate as Chief Judge 3 several days, in which time 5 or 6 were cleared by Proclamation, and almost as many by Trial; so that all were acquitted....

So that by theGoodness of Godwe are once more out of present danger of this Hobgoblin monster; the standing evidence used atSalemwere called, but did not appear.

There were others also at Charlestown brought upon their Tryals, who had formerly confessed themselves to be witches; but upon their Tryals deny’d it; and were all cleared; So that at present there is nofurther prosecution of any.”A Further Account of the Tryals, London, 1693, p. 10.

The court apparently met December 31st, and sat into January, which would account for the apparent discrepancy in regard to the time of its session.

91The authorities were accused of great partiality in allowing, in several cases, persons accused by the afflicted to escape, when they were either related to them or their personal friends. Brattle, pp. 69, 70.

92Calef,More Wonders, p. 144.

93Calef, p. 144. Hutchinson, ii. 61.

94Calef, pp. 55–64.

95Smith,History of Delaware County, 152, 153.

96Documentary History of the State of New York, iv. 85–88.

97Barber,Historical Collections, Virginia, 436–438.

98Hutchinson, ii. 62.

99Calef, p. 105. Brattle,as above, pp. 72, 78.

100Hutchinson, ii. 22.

101Brattle,as above, p. 75.

Back to Index Next