AMERICAN CLASSICS

SALEM WITCHCRAFT

_With an Account of Salem VillageandA History of Opinions onWitchcraft and Kindred Subjects_

CHARLES W. UPHAM

[Illustration: [autograph] Charles W. Upham. ]

_Volume I_

FREDERICK UNGAR PUBLISHING CO. 

_New York_

[Transcriber's Note: Originally published 1867]

_Fourth Printing, 1969_

_Printed in the United States of America_

Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 59-10887

[Illustration: THE TOWNSEND BISHOP HOUSE. --VOL. I. , 70, 96;VOL. II. , 294, 467. ]

DEDICATED

TO

OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES, PROFESSOR OF ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY IN

HARVARD UNIVERSITY. 

CONTENTS. 

VOLUME I. 

 PAGE

PREFACE vii to xiv

MAP AND ILLUSTRATIONS xv to xvii

INDEX TO THE MAP xix to xxvii

GENERAL INDEX xxix to xl

INTRODUCTION 1 to 12

PART FIRST. --SALEM VILLAGE 12 to 322

PART SECOND. --WITCHCRAFT 325 to 469

VOLUME II. 

 PAGE

PART THIRD. --WITCHCRAFT AT SALEM VILLAGE 1 to 444

SUPPLEMENT 447 to 522

APPENDIX 525 to 553

PREFACE. 

This work was originally constructed, and in previous editionsappeared, in the form of Lectures. The only vestiges of that form, inits present shape, are certain modes of expression. The languageretains the character of an address by a speaker to his hearers; beingmore familiar, direct, and personal than is ordinarily employed in therelations of an author to a reader. 

The former work was prepared under circumstances which prevented athorough investigation of the subject. Leisure and freedom fromprofessional duties have now enabled me to prosecute the researchesnecessary to do justice to it. 

The "Lectures on Witchcraft, " published in 1831, have long been out ofprint. Although frequently importuned to prepare a new edition, I wasunwilling to issue again what I had discovered to be an insufficientpresentation of the subject. In the mean time, it constantly becamemore and more apparent, that much injury was resulting from the wantof a complete and correct view of a transaction so often referred to, and universally misunderstood. 

The first volume of this work contains what seems to me necessary toprepare the reader for the second, in which the incidents andcircumstances connected with the witchcraft prosecutions in 1692, atthe village and in the town of Salem, are reduced to chronologicalorder, and exhibited in detail. 

As showing how far the beliefs of the understanding, the perceptionsof the senses, and the delusions of the imagination, may beconfounded, the subject belongs not only to theology and moral andpolitical science, but to physiology, in its original and proper use, as embracing our whole nature; and the facts presented may help toconclusions relating to what is justly regarded as the great mysteryof our being, --the connection between the body and the mind. 

It is unnecessary to mention the various well-known works of authorityand illustration, as they are referred to in the text. But I cannotrefrain from bearing my grateful testimony to the value of the"Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society" and the"New-England Historical and Genealogical Register. " The "HistoricalCollections" and the "Proceedings" of the Essex Institute haveafforded me inestimable assistance. Such works as these are providingthe materials that will secure to our country a history such as noother nation can have. Our first age will not be shrouded in darknessand consigned to fable, but, in all its details, brought within therealm of knowledge. Every person who desires to preserve the memory ofhis ancestors, and appreciate the elements of our institutions andcivilization, ought to place these works, and others like them, on theshelves of his library, in an unbroken and continuing series. A debtof gratitude is due to the earnest, laborious, and disinterestedstudents who are contributing the results of their explorations to thetreasures of antiquarian and genealogical learning which accumulate inthese publications. 

A source of investigation, especially indispensable in the preparationof the present work, deserves to be particularly noticed. In 1647, theGeneral Court of Massachusetts provided by law for the taking oftestimony, in all cases, under certain regulations, in the form ofdepositions, to be preserved _in perpetuam rei memoriam_. The evidenceof witnesses was prepared in writing, beforehand, to be used at thetrials; they to be present at the time, to meet further inquiry, ifliving within ten miles, and not unavoidably prevented. In a capitalcase, the presence of the witness, as well as his written testimony, was absolutely required. These depositions were lodged in the files, and constitute the most valuable materials of history. In our day, the statements of witnesses ordinarily live only in the memory ofpersons present at the trials, and are soon lost in oblivion. In casesattracting unusual interest, stenographers are employed to furnishthem to the press. There were no newspaper reporters or "courtcalendars" in the early colonial times; but these depositions morethan supply their place. Given in, as they were, in all sorts ofcases, --of wills, contracts, boundaries and encroachments, assault andbattery, slander, larceny, &c. , they let us into the interior, thevery inmost recesses, of life and society in all their forms. Theextent to which, by the aid of WILLIAM P. UPHAM, Esq. , ofSalem, I have drawn from this source is apparent at every page. 

A word is necessary to be said relating to the originals of thedocuments that belong to the witchcraft proceedings. They wereprobably all deposited at the time in the clerk's office of EssexCounty. A considerable number of them were, from some cause, transferred to the State archives, and have been carefully preserved. Of the residue, a very large proportion have been abstracted from timeto time by unauthorized hands, and many, it is feared, destroyed orotherwise lost. Two very valuable parcels have found their way intothe libraries of the Massachusetts Historical Society and the EssexInstitute, where they are faithfully secured. A few others have cometo light among papers in the possession of individuals. It is to behoped, that, if any more should be found, they will be lodged in somepublic institution; so that, if thought best, they may all becollected, arranged, and placed beyond wear, tear, and loss, in theperpetual custody of type. 

The papers remaining in the office of the clerk of this county weretranscribed into a volume a few years since; the copyist supplying, conjecturally, headings to the several documents. Although he executedhis work in an elegant manner, and succeeded in giving correctly manydocuments hard to be deciphered, such errors, owing to the conditionof the papers, occurred in arranging them, transcribing theircontents, and framing their headings, that I have had to resort to theoriginals throughout. 

As the object of this work is to give to the reader of the present dayan intelligible view of a transaction of the past, and not toillustrate any thing else than the said transaction, no attempt hasbeen made to preserve the orthography of that period. Most of theoriginal papers were written without any expectation that they wouldever be submitted to inspection in print; many of them by plaincountry people, without skill in the structure of sentences, or regardto spelling; which, in truth, was then quite unsettled. It is nouncommon thing to find the same word spelled differently in the samedocument. It is very questionable whether it is expedient or just toperpetuate blemishes, often the result of haste or carelessness, arising from mere inadvertence. In some instances, where the interestof the passage seemed to require it, the antique style is preserved. In no case is a word changed or the structure altered; but the nowreceived spelling is generally adopted, and the punctuation made toexpress the original sense. 

It is indeed necessary, in what claims to be an exact reprint of anold work, to imitate its orthography precisely, even at the expense ofdifficulty in apprehending at once the meaning, and of perpetuatingerrors of carelessness and ignorance. Such modern reproductions arevaluable, and have an interest of their own. They deserve the favor ofall who desire to examine critically, and in the most authentic form, publications of which the original copies are rare, and the earliesteditions exhausted. The enlightened and enterprising publishers whoare thus providing facsimiles of old books and important documents ofpast ages ought to be encouraged and rewarded by a generous public. But the present work does not belong to that class, or make anypretensions of that kind. 

My thanks are especially due to the Hon. ASAHEL HUNTINGTON, clerk ofthe courts in Essex County, for his kindness in facilitating the useof the materials in his office; to the Hon. OLIVER WARNER, secretaryof the Commonwealth, and the officers of his department; and toSTEPHEN N. GIFFORD, Esq. , clerk of the Senate. 

DAVID PULSIFER, Esq. , in the office of the Secretary ofState, is well known for his pre-eminent skill and experience inmastering the chirography of the primitive colonial times, andelucidating its peculiarities. He has been unwearied in his labors, and most earnest in his efforts, to serve me. 

Mr. SAMUEL G. DRAKE, who has so largely illustrated ourhistory and explored its sources, has, by spontaneous and considerateacts of courtesy rendered me important help. Similar expressions offriendly interest by Mr. WILLIAM B. TOWNE, of Brookline, Mass. ; Hon. J. HAMMOND TRUMBULL, of Hartford, Conn. ; andGEORGE H. MOORE, Esq. , of New-York City, --are gratefullyacknowledged. 

SAMUEL P. FOWLER, Esq. , of Danvers, generously placed at mydisposal his valuable stores of knowledge relating to the subject. Theofficers in charge of the original papers, in the Historical Societyand the Essex Institute, have allowed me to examine and use them. 

I cordially express my acknowledgments to the Hon. BENJAMIN F. BROWNE, of Salem, who, retired from public life and the cares of business, isgiving the leisure of his venerable years to the collection, preservation, and liberal contribution of an unequalled amount ofknowledge respecting our local antiquities. 

CHARLES W. PALFRAY, Esq. , while attending the General Courtas a Representative of Salem, in 1866, gave me the great benefit ofhis explorations among the records and papers in the State House. 

Mr. MOSES PRINCE, of Danvers Centre, is an embodiment of thehistory, genealogy, and traditions of that locality, and has taken anactive and zealous interest in the preparation of this work. ANDREW NICHOLS, Esq. , of Danvers, and the family of the lateColonel PERLEY PUTNAM, of Salem, also rendered me much aid. 

I am indebted to CHARLES DAVIS, Esq. , of Beverly, for the useof the record-book of the church, composed of "the brethren andsisters belonging to Bass River, " gathered Sept. 20, 1667, now theFirst Church of Beverly; and to JAMES HILL, Esq. , town-clerkof that place, for access to the records in his charge. 

To GILBERT TAPLEY, Esq. , chairman of the committee of theparish, and AUGUSTUS MUDGE, Esq. , its clerk, and to the Rev. Mr. RICE, pastor of the church, at Danvers Centre, I cannotadequately express my obligations. Without the free use of theoriginal parish and church record-books with which they intrusted me, and having them constantly at hand, I could not have begun adequatelyto tell the story of Salem Village or the Witchcraft Delusion. 

C. W. U. 

MAP AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 

The map, based upon various local maps and the Coast-Survey chart, isthe result of much personal exploration and perambulation of theground. It may claim to be a very exact representation of many of theoriginal grants and farms. The locality of the houses, mills, andbridges, in 1692, is given in some cases precisely, and in all withnear approximation. The task has been a difficult one. An originalplot of Governor Endicott's Ipswich River grant, No. III. , is in theState House, and one of the Swinnerton grant, No. XIX. , in the Salemtown-books. Neither of them, however, affords elements by which toestablish its exact location. A plot of the Townsend Bishop grant, No. XX. , as its boundaries were finally determined, is in the State House, and another of the same in the court-files of the county. This givesone fixed and known point, Hadlock's Bridge, from which, following thelines by points of compass and distances, as indicated on the plot anddescribed in the Colonial Records, all the sides of the grant are laidout with accuracy, and its place on the map determined with absolutecertainty. A very perfect and scientifically executed plan of a partof the boundary between Salem and Reading in 1666 is in the StateHouse; of which an exact tracing was kindly furnished by Mr. H. J. COOLIDGE, of the Secretary of State's office. It gives two of thesides of the Governor Bellingham grant, No. IV. , in such a manner asto afford the means of projecting it with entire certainty, and fixingits locality. There are no other plots of original or early grants orfarms on this territory; but, starting from the Bishop and Bellinghamgrants thus laid out in their respective places, by a collation ofdeeds of conveyance and partition on record, with the aid of portionsof the primitive stone-walls still remaining, and measurements restingon permanent objects, the entire region has been reduced to ademarkation comprehending the whole area. The locations ofthen-existing roads have been obtained from the returns of laying-outcommittees, and other evidence in the records and files. Theconstruction of the map, in all its details, is the result of theresearches and labors of W. P. UPHAM. 

The death-warrant is a photograph by E. R. PERKINS, of Salem. The original, among the papers on file in the office of the clerk ofthe courts of Essex County, having always been regarded as a greatcuriosity, has been subjected to constant handling, and become muchobscured by dilapidation. The letters, and in some instances entirewords, at the end of the lines, are worn off. To preserve it, ifpossible, from further injury, it has been pasted on cloth. Owing tothis circumstance, and the yellowish hue to which the paper has faded, it does not take favorably by photograph; but the exactness ofimitation, which can only thus be obtained with absolute certainty, ismore important than any other consideration. Only so much as containsthe body of the warrant, the sheriff's return, and the seal, aregiven. The tattered margins are avoided, as they reveal the cloth, and impair the antique aspect of the document. The original is slowlydisintegrating and wasting away, notwithstanding the efforts topreserve it; and its appearance, as seen to-day, can only beperpetuated in photograph. The warrant is reduced about one-third, andthe return one-half. 

The Townsend Bishop house and the outlines of Witch Hill are fromsketches by O. W. H. UPHAM. The English house is from a drawingmade on the spot by J. R. PENNIMAN of Boston, in 1822, a fewyears before its demolition, for the use of which I am indebted toJAMES KIMBALL, Esq. , of Salem. The view of Salem Village andof the Jacobs' house are reduced, by O. W. H. UPHAM, fromphotographs by E. R. PERKINS. 

The map and other engravings, including the autographs, were alldelineated by O. W. H. UPHAM. 

[Illustration: [map]]

INDEX TO THE MAP. 

DWELLINGS IN 1692. 

 [The Map shows all the houses standing in 1692 within the bounds of Salem Village; some others in the vicinity are also given. The houses are numbered on the Map with Arabic numerals, 1, 2, 3, &c. , beginning at the top, and proceeding from left to right. In the following list, against each number, is given the name of the occupant in 1692, and, in some cases, that of the recent occupant or owner of the locality is added in parenthesis. ]

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS LIST. 

_s. _ The same house believed to be still standing. 

_s. M. _ The same house standing within the memory of persons nowliving. 

_t. R. _ Traces of the house remain. 

_c. _ The site given is conjectural. 

1. John Willard. _c. _

2. Isaac Easty. 

3. Francis Peabody. _c. _

4. Joseph Porter. (John Bradstreet. )

5. William Hobbs. _t. R. _

6. John Robinson. 

7. William Nichols. _t. R. _

8. Bray Wilkins. _c. _

9. Aaron Way. (A. Batchelder. )

10. Thomas Bailey. 

11. Thomas Fuller, Sr. (Abijah Fuller. )

12. William Way. 

13. Francis Elliot. _c. _

14. Jonathan Knight. _c. _

15. Thomas Cave. (Jonathan Berry. )

16. Philip Knight. (J. D. Andrews. )

17. Isaac Burton. 

18. John Nichols, Jr. (Jonathan Perry and Aaron Jenkins. ) _s. _

19. Humphrey Case. _t. R. _

20. Thomas Fuller, Jr. (J. A. Esty. ) _s. _

21. Jacob Fuller. 

22. Benjamin Fuller. 

23. Deacon Edward Putnam. _s. M. _

24. Sergeant Thomas Putnam. (Moses Perkins. ) _s. _

25. Peter Prescot. (Daniel Towne. )

26. Ezekiel Cheever. (Chas. P. Preston. ) _s. M. _

27. Eleazer Putnam. (John Preston. ) _s. M. _

28. Henry Kenny. 

29. John Martin. (Edward Wyatt. )

30. John Dale. (Philip H. Wentworth. )

31. Joseph Prince. (Philip H. Wentworth. )

32. Joseph Putnam. (S. Clark. ) _s. _

33. John Putnam 3d. 

34. Benjamin Putnam. 

35. Daniel Andrew. (Joel Wilkins. )

36. John Leach, Jr. _c. _

37. John Putnam, Jr. (Charles Peabody. )

38. Joshua Rea. (Francis Dodge. ) _s. _

39. Mary, wid. Of Thos. Putnam. (William R. Putnam. ) _s. _

 [Birthplace of Gen. Israel Putnam. Gen. Putnam also lived in a house, the cellar and well of which are still visible, about one hundred rods north of this, and just west of the present dwelling of Andrew Nichols. ]

40. Alexander Osburn and James Prince. (Stephen Driver. ) _s. _

41. Jonathan Putnam. (Nath. Boardman. ) _s. _

42. George Jacobs, Jr. 

43. Peter Cloyse. _t. R. _

44. William Small. _s. M. _

45. John Darling. (George Peabody. ) _s. M. _

46. James Putnam. (Wm. A. Lander. ) _s. M. _

47. Capt. John Putnam. (Wm. A. Lander. )

48. Daniel Rea. (Augustus Fowler. ) _s. _

49. Henry Brown. 

50. John Hutchinson. (George Peabody. ) _t. R. _

51. Joseph Whipple. _s. M. _

52. Benjamin Porter. (Joseph S. Cabot. )

53. Joseph Herrick. (R. P. Waters. )

54. John Phelps. _c. _

55. George Flint. _c. _

56. Ruth Sibley. _s. M. _

57. John Buxton. 

58. William Allin. 

59. Samuel Brabrook. _c. _

60. James Smith. 

61. Samuel Sibley. _t. R. _

62. Rev. James Bayley. (Benjamin Hutchinson. )

63. John Shepherd. (Rev. M. P. Braman. )

64. John Flint. 

65. John Rea. _s. M. _

66. Joshua Rea. (Adam Nesmith. ) _s. M. _

67. Jeremiah Watts. 

68. Edward Bishop, the sawyer. (Josiah Trask. )

69. Edward Bishop, husbandman. 

70. Capt. Thomas Rayment. 

71. Joseph Hutchinson, Jr. (Job Hutchinson. )

72. William Buckley. 

73. Joseph Houlton, Jr. _t. R. _

74. Thomas Haines. (Elijah Pope. ) _s. _

75. John Houlton. (F. A. Wilkins. ) _s. _

76. Joseph Houlton, Sr. (Isaac Demsey. )

77. Joseph Hutchinson, Sr. _t. R. _

78. John Hadlock. (Saml. P. Nourse. ) _s. M. _

79. Nathaniel Putnam. (Judge Putnam. ) _t. R. _

80. Israel Porter. _s. M. _

81. James Kettle. 

82. Royal Side Schoolhouse. 

83. Dr. William Griggs. 

84. John Trask. (I. Trask. ) _s. _

85. Cornelius Baker. 

86. Exercise Conant. (Subsequently, Rev. John Chipman. )

87. Deacon Peter Woodberry. _t. R. _

88. John Rayment, Sr. (Col. J. W. Raymond. )

89. Joseph Swinnerton. (Nathl. Pope. )

90. Benjamin Hutchinson. _s. M. _

91. Job Swinnerton. (Amos Cross. )

92. Henry Houlton. (Artemas Wilson. )

93. Sarah, widow of Benjamin Houlton. (Judge Houlton. ) _s. _

94. Samuel Rea. 

95. Francis Nurse. (Orin Putnam. ) _s. _

96. Samuel Nurse. (E. G. Hyde. ) _s. _

97. John Tarbell. _s. _

98. Thomas Preston. 

99. Jacob Barney. 

100. Sergeant John Leach, Sr. (George Southwick. ) _s. M. _

101. Capt. John Dodge, Jr. (Charles Davis. ) _t. R. _

102. Henry Herrick. (Nathl. Porter. )

 [This had been the homestead of his father, Henry Herrick. ]

103. Lot Conant. 

 [This was the homestead of his father, Roger Conant. ]

104. Benjamin Balch, Sr. (Azor Dodge. ) _s. _

 [This was the homestead of his father, John Balch. ]

105. Thomas Gage. (Charles Davis. ) _s. _

106. Families of Trask, Grover, Haskell, and Elliott. 

107. Rev. John Hale. 

108. Dorcas, widow of William Hoar. 

109. William and Samuel Upton. _c. _

110. Abraham and John Smith. (J. Smith. ) _s. _

 [This had been the homestead of Robert Goodell. ]

111. Isaac Goodell. (Perley Goodale. )

112. Abraham Walcot. (Jasper Pope. ) _s. M. _

113. Zachariah Goodell. (Jasper Pope. )

114. Samuel Abbey. 

115. John Walcot. 

116. Jasper Swinnerton. _s. M. _

117. John Weldon. Captain Samuel Gardner's farm. (Asa Gardner. )

118. Gertrude, widow of Joseph Pope. (Rev. Willard Spaulding. ) _s. M. _

119. Capt. Thomas Flint. _s. _

120. Joseph Flint. _s. _

121. Isaac Needham. _c. _

122. The widow Sheldon and her daughter Susannah. 

123. Walter Phillips. (F. Peabody, Jr. )

124. Samuel Endicott. _s. M. _

125. Families of Creasy, King, Batchelder, and Howard. 

126. John Green. (J. Green) _s. _

127. John Parker. 

128. Giles Corey. _t. R. _

129. Henry Crosby. 

130. Anthony Needham, Jr. (E. And J. S. Needham. )

131. Anthony Needham, Sr. 

132. Nathaniel Felton. (Nathaniel Felton. ) _s. _

133. James Houlton. (Thorndike Procter. )

134. John Felton. 

135. Sarah Phillips. 

136. Benjamin Scarlett. (District Schoolhouse No. 6. )

137. Benjamin Pope. 

138. Robert Moulton. (T. Taylor. ) _c. _

139. John Procter. 

140. Daniel Epps. _c. _

141. Joseph Buxton. _c. _

142. George Jacobs, Sr. (Allen Jacobs. ) _s. _

143. William Shaw. 

144. Alice, widow of Michael Shaflin. (J. King. )

145. Families of Buffington, Stone, and Southwick. 

146. William Osborne. 

147. Families of Very, Gould, Follet, and Meacham. 

+ Nathaniel Ingersoll. 

¶ Rev. Samuel Parris. _t. R. _

[Symbol: box] Captain Jonathan Walcot. _t. R. _

TOWN OF SALEM. 

 [For the sites of the following dwellings, &c. , referred to in the book, see the small capitals in the lower right-hand corner of the Map. ]

A. Jonathan Corwin. B. Samuel Shattock, John Cook, Isaac Sterns, John Bly. C. Bartholomew Gedney. D. Stephen Sewall. E. Court House. F. Rev. Nicholas Noyes. G. John Hathorne. H. George Corwin, High-sheriff. I. Bridget Bishop. J. Meeting-house. K. Gedney's "Ship Tavern. "L. The Prison. M. Samuel Beadle. N. Rev. John Higginson. O. Ann Pudeator, John Best. P. Capt. John Higginson. Q. The Town Common. R. John Robinson. S. Christopher Babbage. T. Thomas Beadle. U. Philip English. W. Place of execution, "Witch Hill. "

 * * * * *

GRANTS. 

 NOTE. --The grants are numbered on the Map with Roman numerals, the bounds being indicated by broken lines. They were all granted by the town of Salem, unless otherwise stated. 

I. JOHN GOULD. 

Sold by him to Capt. George Corwin, March 29, 1674; and by Capt. Corwin's widow sold to Philip Knight, Thomas Wilkins, Sr. , HenryWilkins, and John Willard, March 1, 1690. 

II. ZACCHEUS GOULD. 

Sold by him to Capt. John Putnam before 1662; owned in 1692 by Capt. Putnam, Thomas Cave, Francis Elliot, John Nichols, Jr. , ThomasNichols, and William Way. 

The above, together, comprised land granted by the General Court toRowley, May 31, 1652, and laid out by Rowley to John and ZaccheusGould. 

III. GOV. JOHN ENDICOTT. 

Ipswich-river Farm, 550 acres, granted by the General Court, Nov. 5, 1639; owned in 1692 by his grandsons, Zerubabel, Benjamin, andJoseph. 

The General Court, Oct. 14, 1651, also granted to Gov. Endicott 300acres on the southerly side of this farm, in "Blind Hole, " oncondition that he would set up copper-works. As the land appearsafterwards to have been owned by John Porter, it is probable that thecopper-mine was soon abandoned; but traces of it are still to be seenthere. 

IV. GOV. RICHARD BELLINGHAM. 

Granted by the General Court, Nov. 5, 1639. 

V. FARMER JOHN PORTER. 

Owned in 1692 by his son, Benjamin Porter. This includes a grant toTownsend Bishop, sold to John Porter in 1648; also 200 acres grantedto John Porter, Sept. 30, 1647. That part in Topsfield was released byTopsfield to Benjamin Porter, May 2, 1687. 

VI. CAPT. RICHARD DAVENPORT. 

Granted Feb. 20, 1637, and Nov. 26, 1638; sold, with the Hathornefarm, to John Putnam, John Hathorne, Richard Hutchinson, and DanielRea, April 17, 1662. 

VII. CAPT. WILLIAM HATHORNE. 

Granted Feb. 17, 1637; sold with the above. 

VIII. JOHN PUTNAM THE ELDER. 

This comprises a grant of 100 acres to John Putnam, Jan. 20, 1641; 80acres to Ralph Fogg, in 1636; 40 acres (formerly Richard Waterman's)to Thomas Lothrop, Nov. 29, 1642; and 30 acres to Ann Scarlett, in1636. The whole owned by James and Jonathan Putnam in 1692. 

IX. DANIEL REA. 

Granted to him in 1636; owned by his grandson, Daniel Rea, in 1692. 

X. REV. HUGH PETERS. 

Granted Nov. 12, 1638; laid out June 15, 1674, being then in thepossession of Capt. John Corwin; sold by Mrs. Margaret Corwin to HenryBrown, May 22, 1693. 

XI. CAPT. GEORGE CORWIN. 

Granted Aug. 21, 1648; sold (including 30 acres formerly JohnBridgman's) to Job Swinnerton, Jr. , and William Cantlebury, Jan. 18, 1661. 

XII. RICHARD HUTCHINSON, JOHN THORNDIKE, AND MR. FREEMAN. 

Granted in 1636 and 1637; owned in 1692 by Joseph, son of RichardHutchinson, and by Sarah, wife of Joseph Whipple, daughter of John, and grand-daughter of Richard Hutchinson. 

XIII. SAMUEL SHARPE. 

Granted Jan. 23, 1637; sold to John Porter, May 10, 1643; owned by hisson, Israel Porter, in 1692. 

XIV. JOHN HOLGRAVE. 

Granted Nov. 26, 1638; sold to Jeffry Massey and Nicholas Woodberry, April 2, 1652; and to Joshua Rea, Jan. 1, 1657. 

XV. WILLIAM ALFORD. 

Granted in 1636; sold to Henry Herrick before 1653. 

XVI. FRANCIS WESTON. 

Granted in 1636; sold by John Pease to Richard Ingersoll and WilliamHaynes, in 1644. 

XVII. ELIAS STILEMAN. 

Granted in 1636; sold to Richard Hutchinson, June 1, 1648. 

XVIII. ROBERT GOODELL. 

504 acres laid out to him, Feb. 13, 1652: comprising 40 acres grantedto him "long since, " and other parcels bought by him of the originalgrantees; viz. , Joseph Grafton, John Sanders, Henry Herrick, WilliamBound, Robert Pease and his brother, Robert Cotta, William Walcott, Edmund Marshall, Thomas Antrum, Michael Shaflin, Thomas Venner, JohnBarber, Philemon Dickenson, and William Goose. 

XIX. JOB SWINNERTON. 

300 acres laid out, Jan. 5, 1697, to Job Swinnerton, Jr. ; having beenowned by his father, by grant and purchase, as early as 1650. 

XX. TOWNSEND BISHOP. 

Granted Jan. 11, 1636; sold to Francis Nurse, April 29, 1678. 

XXI. REV. SAMUEL SKELTON. 

Granted by the General Court, July 3, 1632; sold to John Porter, March8, 1649; owned by the heirs of John Porter in 1692. 

XXII. JOHN WINTHROP, JR. 

Granted June 25, 1638; sold by his daughter to John Green, Aug. 9, 1683. 

XXIII. REV. EDWARD NORRIS. 

Granted Jan. 21, 1640: sold to Elleanor Trusler, Aug. 7, 1654; toJoseph Pope, July 18, 1664. 

XXIV. ROBERT COLE. 

Granted Dec. 21, 1635; sold to Emanuel Downing before July 16th, 1638;conveyed by him to John and Adam Winthrop, in trust for himself andwife during their lives, and then for his son, George Downing, July23, 1644; leased to John Procter in 1666; occupied by him and his sonBenjamin in 1692. 

XXV. COL. THOMAS REED. 

Granted Feb. 16, 1636; sold to Daniel Epps, June 28, 1701, by WaitWinthrop, as attorney to Samuel Reed, only son and heir of ThomasReed. 

XXVI. JOHN HUMPHREY. 

Granted by the General Court, Nov. 7, 1632, May 6, 1635, and March 12, 1638, 1, 500 acres, part in Salem and part in Lynn; sold, on execution, to Robert Saltonstall, Dec. 6, 1642, and by him sold to StephenWinthrop, June 7, 1645, whose daughters--Margaret Willie and JudithHancock--owned it in 1692: that part within the bounds of Salem isgiven in the Map according to the report of a committee, July 11, 1695. 

ORCHARD FARM. 

Granted by the General Court to Gov. Endicott; owned by his grandsons, John and Samuel, in 1692. 

THE GOVERNOR'S PLAIN. 

Granted to Gov. Endicott, Jan. 27, 1637, Dec. 23, 1639, and Feb. 5, 1644; including land granted under the name of "small lots. "

JOHNSON'S PLAIN. 

Granted to Francis Johnson, Jan. 23, 1637. 

FARMS. 

 [The bounds of farms are indicated by dotted lines, except where they coincide with the bounds of grants. The following are those given on the Map. ]

_1st_, Between grants No. XI. And VII. , and extending north of theVillage bounds, and south as far as Andover Road, --about 500 acres;bought by Thomas and Nathaniel Putnam of Philip Cromwell, Walter Priceand Thomas Cole, Jeffry Massey, John Reaves, Joseph and John Gardner, and Giles Corey; owned, in 1692, by Edward Putnam, Thomas Putnam, andJohn Putnam, Jr. This includes also 50 acres granted to NathanielPutnam, Nov. 19, 1649. 

_2d_, At the northerly end of Grant No. VII. , and extending north ofthe Village bounds, --100 acres, known as the "Ruck Farm;" granted toThomas Ruck, May 27, 1654, and sold to Philip Knight and Thomas Cave, July 24, 1672. 

_3d_, North of the "Ruck Farm, "--100 acres; sold by William Robinsonto Richard Richards and William Hobbs, Jan. 1, 1660, and owned, in1692, by William Hobbs and John Robinson. 

_4th_, Next east, bounded northeast by Nichols Brook, and extendingwithin the Village bounds, --200 acres; granted to Henry Bartholomew, and sold by him to William Nichols before 1652. 

_5th_, East of the "Ruck Farm, " and extending across the Villagebounds, --about 150 acres; granted to John Putnam and Richard Graves. Part of this was sold by John Putnam to Capt. Thomas Lothrop, June 2, 1669, and was owned by Ezekiel Cheever in 1692: the rest was owned byJohn Putnam. 

_6th_, East of the above, and south of the Nichols Farm, --60 acres, owned by Henry Kenny; also 50 acres granted to Job Swinnerton, givenby him to his son, Dr. John Swinnerton, and sold to John Martin andJohn Dale, March 20, 1693. 

_7th_, South of the above, and east of Grant No. VII. , --150 acres;granted to William Pester, July 16, 1638, and sold by Capt. WilliamTrask to Robert Prince, Dec. 20, 1655. 

_8th_, East of Grant No. VI. , and extending north to Smith's Hill andsouth to Grant No. IX. , --about 400 acres; granted to Allen Kenniston, John Porter, and Thomas Smith, and owned, in 1692, by Daniel Andrewand Peter Cloyse. 

_9th_, East and southeast of Smith's Hill, --500 acres; granted toEmanuel Downing in 1638 and 1649, and sold by him to John Porter, April 15, 1650. John Porter gave this farm to his son Joseph, upon hismarriage with Anna daughter of William Hathorne. 

_10th_, East of Frost-fish River, including the northerly end ofLeach's Hill, and extending across Ipswich Road, --about 250 acres, known as the "Barney Farm;" originally granted to Richard Ingersoll, Jacob Barney, and Pascha Foote. 

_11th_, South of the "Barney Farm, "--about 200 acres; granted toLawrence, Richard, and John Leach; owned, in 1692, by John Leach. 

_12th_, North of the "Barney Farm, " and between grants No. XIII. AndXIV. , --about 250 acres, known as "Gott's Corner;" granted to CharlesGott, Jeffry Massey, Thomas Watson, John Pickard, and Jacob Barney, and by them sold to John Porter. (Recently known as the "BurleyFarm. ")

_13th_, Eastward of the "Barney Farm, "--40 acres; originally grantedto George Harris, and afterwards to Osmond Trask; owned, in 1692, byhis son, John Trask. 

_14th_, Next east, and extending across Ipswich Road, --40 acres;granted to Edward Bishop, Dec. 28, 1646; owned, in 1692, by his son, Edward Bishop, "the sawyer. "

_15th_, At the northwest end of Felton's Hill, and extending acrossthe Village line, --about 60 acres; owned by Nathaniel Putnam. 

_16th_, Southeast of Grant No. XXIII. , --a farm of about 150 acres;owned by Giles Corey, including 50 acres bought by him of RobertGoodell, March 15, 1660, and 50 acres bought by him of Ezra andNathaniel Clapp, of Dorchester, heirs of John Alderman, July 4, 1663. 

_17th_, Northeast of the above, --150 acres granted to Mrs. AnnaHigginson in 1636; sold by Rev. John Higginson to John Pickering, March 23, 1652; and by him to John Woody and Thomas Flint, Oct. 18, 1654; owned in 1692 by Thomas and Joseph Flint. 

GENERAL INDEX. 

A. 

Abbey, Thomas, 129. 

Abbey, Samuel, ii. 200, 272. 

Abbot, Joseph, 123. 

Abbot, Nehemiah, ii. 128, 133, 208. 

Aborn, Samuel, Jr. , ii. 272. 

Addington, Isaac, ii. 102, 474. 

Afflicted children, ii. 112, 384, 465. 

Age, reverence for, 217. 

Agrippa, Henry Cornelius, 367. 

Alford, William, 66. 

Alden, John, ii. 208, 243-247, 255, 453. 

Allen, James, 78-84; ii. 89, 309, 494, 550-553. 

Allin, James, ii. 226. 

America, the peopling of, 395. 

Amsterdam, 460. 

Andover, ii. 247. 

Andrew, Daniel, 155, 214, 251, 270, 296, 319; ii. 59, 187, 272, 497, 550. 

Andrews, Ann, ii. 170, 319. 

Andrews, John, ii. 306. 

Andrews, John, Jr. , ii. 306. 

Andrews, Joseph, ii. 306. 

Andrews, William, ii. 306. 

Andrews, Robert, 123. 

Andros, Sir Edmund, ii. 99, 154. 

Appleton, Samuel, 119; ii. 102, 250. 

Apon, Peter, 342. 

Arnold de Villa Nova, 342. 

Arnold, Margaret, 356. 

B. 

Babbage, Christopher, ii. 184. 

Bachelder, Mark, 123. 

Bacheler, John, ii. 475. 

Bacon, Francis, 383. 

Bacon, Roger, 341. 

Badger, John, 445. 

Baker, Eben, 123. 

Bailey, John, ii. 89, 310. 

Balch, John, 129. 

Balch, Joseph, 105. 

Baptism: its subjects, 307. 

Barbadoes, 287. 

Barker, Abigail, ii. 349, 404. 

Barnard, Thomas, ii. 477. 

Barnes, Benjamin, ii. 499. 

Barney, Jacob, 40, 140. 

Barrett, Thomas, ii. 353. 

Bartholomew, Henry, 206. 

Bartholomew, William, 428. 

Barton, Elizabeth, 343. 

Bassett, William, ii. 207. 

Batter, Edmund, 40, 46, 57. 

Baxter, Richard, 352, 353, 355, 401, 459. 

Bayley, James, 245-255, 278; autograph, 280; ii. 514. 

Bayley, Joseph, ii. 417. 

Bayley, Thomas, 105. 

Beadle, Samuel, 132; ii. 164, 181. 

Beadle, Thomas, ii. 164, 170, 172. 

Beale, William, ii. 141. 

Beard, Thomas, 360. 

Bears, 210. 

Becket, John, ii. 267. 

Beers, Richard, 104. 

Bekker, Balthasar, 371. 

Belcher, Jonathan, ii. 481. 

Bellingham, Richard, 144. 

Bentley, Richard, 372. 

Bentley, William, ii. 143, 365, 377. 

Best, John, ii. 329. 

Best, John, Jr. , ii. 329. 

Bibber, Sarah, ii. 5, 205, 287. 

Billerica, 9. 

Bishop, Bridget, 143, 191-197; ii. 114, 125-128, 253; trial and execution, 256-267; her house, 463. 

Bishop, Edward, 142; ii. 272. 

Bishop, Edward, 142, 191; ii. 253, 267, 466. 

Bishop, Edward, 141, 143; ii. 128, 135, 383, 465, 478. 

Bishop, Edward, 143. 

Bishop, John, 8. 

Bishop, Richard, 142. 

Bishop, Sarah, ii. 128, 135. 

Bishop, Thomas, 206. 

Bishop, Townsend, 40, 66; his house, 69-74, 96, 97; autograph, 279; ii. 294, 467. 

Black, Mary, ii. 128, 136. 

Blackstone, Sir William, ii. 517. 

Blazdell, Henry, 430. 

Blazed trees, 43. 

Bly, John, ii. 261, 266. 

Bly, William, ii. 266. 

Bloody Brook, 105. 

Booth, Elizabeth, ii. 4, 465. 

Bowden, Michael, ii. 467. 

Bowditch, Nathaniel, 172. 

Boyle, Robert, 359. 

Boynton, Joseph, ii. 553. 

Bradbury, Thomas, ii. 224, 450. 

Bradbury, Mary, ii. 208, 224-238; trial and condemnation, 324, 480. 

Bradford, William, 122. 

Bradstreet, Dudley, ii. 248, 347. 

Bradstreet, John, 428. 

Bradstreet, John, ii. 248, 347. 

Bradstreet, Simon, 124, 139, 147; autograph 279, 451, 454; ii. 99, 455, 456. 

Braman, Milton P. , ii. 516. 

Brattle, William, ii. 450. 

Braybrook, Samuel, ii. 30, 72, 202. 

Bridges, Edmund, 186; ii. 94. 

Bridges, Mary, ii. 349. 

Bridges, Sarah, ii. 349. 

Bridgham, Joseph, ii. 553. 

Bridle-path, 43. 

Britt, Mary, ii. 38. 

Broom-making, 202. 

Browne, Charles, 429. 

Browne, Christopher, 438. 

Browne, Henry, Jr. , 55. 

Browne, Sir Thomas, 357. 

Browne, William, Jr. , 226, 271. 

Buckley, Sarah, ii. 187, 199, 349. 

Buckley, Thomas, 105. 

Buckley, William, ii. 199. 

Burial of those executed, ii. 266, 293, 301, 312, 320. 

Burnham, John, ii. 306. 

Burnham, John, Jr. , ii. 306. 

Burroughs, Charles, ii. 478. 

Burroughs, George, 255, 278; autograph, 280; arrest and examination, ii. 140-163; trial and execution, 296-304, 319, 480, 482, 514. 

Burt, Goody, 437. 

Burton, John, 151. 

Burton, Isaac, 152, 241. 

Burton, Warren, 152. 

Butler, Samuel, 352, 367. 

Butler, William, ii. 306. 

Buxton, Elizabeth, ii 272. 

Buxton, John, 154, 262. 

Byfield, Nathaniel, ii. 455. 

C. 

Calamy, Edmund, 283, 352. 

Calef, Robert, ii. 32, 461, 490. 

Candy, ii. 208, 215, 349. 

Canoes, 61. 

Cantlebury, William, 154. 

Cantlebury, Ruth, ii. 18. 

Capen, Joseph, ii. 326, 478. 

Capital punishment, 377. 

Cary, Elizabeth, ii. 208, 238, 453, 456. 

Cary, Jonathan, ii. 238. 

Carr, Ann, 253; ii. 465. 

Carr, George, ii. 229. 

Carr, James, ii. 232. 

Carr, John, ii. 234. 

Carr, Mary, 253. 

Carr, Richard, ii. 230. 

Carr, Sir Robert, 220. 

Carr, William, ii. 234, 465. 

Carrier, Martha, arrest and examination, ii. 208-215; trial and execution, 296, 480. 

Carrier, Sarah, ii. 209. 

Carter, Bethiah, ii. 187. 

Cartwright, George, 220. 

Casco, 256. 

Case, Humphrey, 154. 

Castle Island, 102. 

Cave, Thomas, 154. 

Chapman, Simon, ii. 219. 

Charter of Massachusetts, 15. 

Checkley, Samuel, ii. 553. 

Cheever, Ezekiel, 111. 

Cheever, Ezekiel, Jr. , 113, 117, 226, 299; ii. 15, 40, 550. 

Cheever, Peter, 226. 

Cheever, Samuel, 113; ii. 193, 478, 550. 

Cheever, Thomas, 113. 

Chickering, Henry, 74. 

Chipman, John, 130. 

Choate, John, ii. 306. 

Choate, Thomas, ii. 306. 

Church, Benjamin, 123. 

Church-of-England Canon, 347. 

Churchill, Sarah, ii. 4, 166, 169. 

Clark, Peter, 171; ii. 513, 516. 

Clark, Thomas, 425. 

Clark, William, 40. 

Cleaves, William, ii. 38, 336. 

Clenton, Rachel, ii. 198. 

Cloutman, William, ii. 267. 

Cloyse, Peter, 269; ii. 9, 59, 94, 465, 485. 

Cloyse, Sarah, ii. 60, 94, 101, 111, 326. 

Cobbye, Goodman, 431. 

Code, Roman, 374. 

Cogswell, John, ii. 306. 

Cogswell, John, Jr. , ii. 306. 

Cogswell, Jonathan, ii. 306. 

Cogswell, William, ii. 306. 

Cogswell, William, Jr. , ii. 306. 

Coldum, Clement, ii. 191. 

Cole, Eunice, 437. 

Colman, Benjamin, ii. 505. 

Colson, Elizabeth, ii. 187. 

Conant, Lot, 133. 

Conant, Roger, 60, 63, 129. 

Confessors, ii. 350, 397. 

Constables, 21. 

Cook, Elisha, ii. 497. 

Cook, Elizabeth, ii. 272. 

Cook, Henry, 57. 

Cook, John, ii. 261. 

Cook, Isaac, ii. 272. 

Cook, Samuel, 230. 

Copper mine, 45. 

Corey, Giles, 181-191, 205; ii. 38, 44, 52, 114, 121, 128; pressed to death, 334-343; excommunicated, 343, 480, 483. 

Corey, Martha, 190; ii. 38-42; examination, 43-55, 111; trial and execution, 324, 458, 507. 

Corlet, Elijah, 111. 

Corwin, George, 57, 98, 226. 

Corwin, George, ii. 252, 470, 472. 

Corwin, George, ii. 484. 

Corwin, John, 55. 

Corwin, Jonathan, 101; ii. 11, 13; autograph, (29, 50, 69, 314, ) 89, 101, 116, 157, 165, 250, 345; letter to, 447, 485, 538. 

Court House, ii. 253. 

Court, Special, ii. 251, 254. 

Court, Superior, of Judicature, ii. 349. 

Cox, Mary, ii. 198. 

Cox, Robert, 123. 

Cradock, Matthew, 17. 

Crane River Bridge, 194. 

Cranmer, Archbishop, 343. 

Creesy, John, 141. 

Crosby, Henry, ii. 38, 45, 50, 124. 

Cullender, Rose, 355. 

D. 

Daland, Benjamin, 230. 

Dane, Francis, ii. 223, 330, 459, 478. 

Dane, Deliverance, ii. 404. 

Dane, John, ii. 475. 

Dane, Nathaniel, ii. 460. 

Danforth, Thomas, 461; ii. 101, 250, 349, 354, 455, 456. 

Darby, Mrs. , 260. 

Darling, James, ii. 201. 

Davenport, John, 385. 

Davenport, Nathaniel, 121, 125-128. 

Davenport, Richard, 100-103. 

Davenport, True Cross, 101, 126. 

Davis, Ephraim, 429. 

Davis, James, 429. 

De La Torre, 361. 

Deane, Charles, 50. 

Death-warrant, ii. 266. 

Deland, Thorndike, ii. 267. 

Demonology, 325, 327. 

Dennison, Daniel, 147. 

Derich, Mary, ii. 208. 

Devil, 325, 338, 387. 

Dexter, Henry M. , 123. 

Dodge, Granville M. , 232. 

Dodge, John, 129. 

Dodge, Josiah, 105. 

Dodge, William, 130. 

Dodge, William, Jr. , 129. 

Dole, John, 444. 

Dolliver, Ann, ii. 194. 

Dolliver, William, ii. 194. 

Douglas, Ann, ii. 179. 

Dounton, William, ii. 274. 

Downer, Robert, ii. 413. 

Downing, Emanuel, 38-46; autograph, 279. 

Downing, Lucy, 39; autograph, 279. 

Downing, Sir George, 46. 

Drake, Samuel G, ii. 26. 

Dreams, ii. 411. 

Druillettes, Gabriel, 37. 

Dudley, Joseph, ii. 480. 

Dudley, Thomas, 23. 

Dugdale, Richard, 354. 

Dummer, Jeremiah, ii. 553. 

Dunny, Amey, 355. 

Dunton, John, ii. 90, 471. 

Dustin, Hannah, 9. 

Dustin, Lydia, ii. 208. 

Dustin, Sarah, ii. 208. 

Dutch, Martha, ii. 179. 

E. 

Eames, Daniel, ii. 331. 

Eames, Rebecca, ii. 324, 480. 

Easty, Isaac, 241; ii. 56, 478. 

Easty, John, 241. 

Easty, Mary, ii. 60; arrest, 128; examination, 137; re-arrest, 200-205; trial and execution, 324-327, 480. 

Education, 111, 213-216, 280, 284; ii. 221. 

Eliot, Andrew, ii. 475. 

Eliot, Daniel, ii. 191. 

Eliot, Edmund, ii. 412. 

Eliot, Elizabeth, 126. 

Emerson, John, 444, 462. 

Emory, George, 57. 

Endicott, John, 16-20, 23, 32-38, 45, 50, 74-79, 95, 454. 

Endicott, John, Jr. , 74-78. 

Endicott, Samuel, 32; ii. 231, 272, 307. 

Endicott, Zerubabel, 32, 35, 58, 84-95. 

Endicott, Zerubabel, ii. 230. 

English, Mary, ii. 128, 136; autograph, 313. 

English, Philip, ii. 128, 140, 255; autograph, 313, 470, 473, 478, 482. 

Essex, Flower of, 104. 

Eveleth, Joseph, ii. 306, 475. 

F. 

Fairfax, Edward, 347. 

Fairfield, William, ii. 267. 

Farmer, Hugh, 335, 390. 

Farrar, Thomas, ii. 187. 

Farrington, John, 123. 

Faulkner, Abigail, ii. 330, 476, 480. 

Fellows, John, ii. 306. 

Felt, David, ii. 267. 

Felton, Benjamin, 56. 

Felton, John, 236; ii. 307. 

Felton, Nathaniel, ii. 272, 307. 

Felton, Nathaniel, Jr. , ii. 307. 

Filmer, Sir Robert, 373. 

Fireplaces, 202. 

First Church in Salem, 243, 246, 271; ii. 257, 290, 483. 

Fisk, Thomas, ii. 284, 475. 

Fisk, Thomas, Jr. , ii. 475. 

Fisk, William, ii. 475. 

Fitch, Jabez, ii. 477. 

Fletcher, Benjamin, ii. 242. 

Flint, John, 141, 154. 

Flint, Samuel, 229. 

Flint, Thomas, 123, 188, 226, 270. 

Flood, John, ii. 208, 331. 

Fogg, Ralph, 57. 

Forests, 7, 27. 

Fosdick, Elizabeth, ii. 208. 

Foster, Abraham, ii. 384. 

Foster, Ann, ii. 351, 398, 480. 

Foster, Isaac, ii. 306. 

Foster, John, ii. 466. 

Foster, Reginald, ii. 306. 

Fowler, Joseph, ii. 206. 

Fowler, Philip, ii. 206. 

Fowler, Samuel P. , ii. 206. 

Fox, Rebecca, ii. 188. 

Foxcroft, Francis, ii. 455. 

Frayll, Samuel, ii. 307. 

Fuller, Benjamin, ii. 177. 

Fuller, Jacob, 227. 

Fuller, John, ii. 280. 

Fuller, Samuel, ii. 177. 

Fuller, Thomas, 187, 227, 250, 288; ii. 25. 

Fuller, Thomas, Jr. , 288; ii. 173. 

G. 

Gallop, John, 122. 

Game, pursuit of, 208. 

Gammon, ----, ii. 354. 

Gardiner, Sir Christopher, 68. 

Gardner, Joseph, 45, 122, 123, 124. 

Gardner, Samuel, 45. 

Gardner, Thomas, 45, 117. 

Gaskill, Edward, ii. 307. 

Gaskill, Samuel, ii. 307. 

Gaule, John, 363. 

Gedney, Bartholomew, 271; ii. 89, 243, 244, 250, 251, 254, 496. 

Gedney, John, 158, 258; ii. 254. 

Gedney, John, Jr. , ii. 254. 

Gedney, Susannah, ii. 254, 264. 

General Court responsible for the executions, ii. 268. 

Gerbert (Sylvester II. ), 339. 

Gerrish, Joseph, ii. 478, 550. 

Gidding, Samuel, ii. 306. 

Gifford, Margaret, 437. 

Gingle, John, 144. 

Glover, Goody, 454. 

Gloyd, John, 186, 189. 

Godfrey, John, 428-436. 

Good, Dorcas, examination of, ii. 71, 111. 

Good, Sarah, ii. 11; examination of, 12-17; trial and execution, 268, 269, 480. 

Good, William, ii. 12, 481. 

Goodell, Abner C. , 141. 

Goodell, Robert, 141. 

Goodhew, William, ii. 306. 

Goodwin, Mr. , 454. 

Governors of Massachusetts, time of election by charter, 17. 

Governor's Plain, 24. 

Gould, Nathan, 432. 

Gould, Thomas, 188. 

Grants, policy of, 22. 

Gray, William, 130. 

Graves, Thomas, ii. 455. 

Green, Joseph, 9, 146, 170; ii. 199, 477, 506, 516. 

Greenslit, John, ii. 298. 

Greenslit, Thomas, ii. 298. 

Griggs, William, ii. 4, 6. 

Griggs, Goody, ii. 111. 

Grover, Edmund, 31. 

H. 

Hakins, Nicholas, 123. 

Hale, John, 195-197, 299, 452; ii. 43, 70, 257, 345, 475, 478, 550. 

Hale, Sir Matthew, 355; ii. 269. 

Halliwell, Henry, 364. 

Handwriting, 214, 277-281; ii. 55. 

Harding, Edward, 123. 

Hardy, George, 443. 

Harris, Benjamin, ii. 90. 

Harris, George, 63. 

Harsnett, Samuel, 369. 

Hart, Thomas, ii. 352. 

Hart, Elizabeth, ii. 187. 

Harwood, John, ii. 275. 

Hathorne, John, 40, 99, 271; ii. 11, 13, 20, 28; autograph, (29, 50, 69, 314), 43, 60, 89, 101, 102, 116, 241, 250. 

Hathorne, William, 46, 57, 99. 

Haverhill, 9. 

Hawkes, Mrs. , ii. 216, 349. 

Haynes, John, 139. 

Haynes, Richard, 138, 140. 

Haynes, Thomas, 139, 260, 431; ii. 132, 465. 

Haynes, William, 40, 138. 

Hazeldon, John, 429. 

Herrick, George, ii. 49, 60, 71, 202, 252, 274, 471. 

Herrick, Henry, 66, 153. 

Herrick, Henry, ii. 475. 

Herrick, Joseph, 129, 141, 269, 270; ii. 12, 28, 272. 

Hibbert's Philosophy of Apparitions, ii. 518. 

Hibbins, Ann, 420-427, 453. 

Higginson, John, 271, 273; ii. 89, 193, 478, 550. 

Highways, 43, 212. 

Highways, surveyors of, 21. 

Hill, Captain, ii. 244. 

Hoar, Dorcas, ii. 140, 144, 384, 480. 

Hobbs, Abigail, ii. 114, 128, 480, 481. 

Hobbs, Deliverance, ii. 128, 161. 

Hobbs, William, ii. 114, 128, 130. 

Holgrave, John, 63. 

Holyoke, Edward, 156. 

Holyoke, Edward Augustus, 156; ii. 377. 

Hopkins, Matthew, 351. 

Horace, 366. 

Horse Bridge, 234. 

Houchins, Jeremiah, 74. 

Houlton, Benjamin, ii. 275, 280, 281. 

Houlton, James, ii. 307. 

Houlton, Joseph, 86, 147, 243, 270; ii. 272, 496. 

Houlton, Joseph, Jr. , 123; ii. 272. 

Houlton, Samuel, 148, 223. 

Houlton, Sarah, ii. 281, 495, 506. 

Houlton, town of, 151. 

Houses, 184. 

How, Elizabeth, ii. 208; examination of, 216-223; trial and execution, 268, 270, 480. 

How, James, Sr. , ii. 221. 

How, John, 241. 

Howard, John, ii. 198. 

Howard, Nathaniel, 141. 

Hubbard, Elizabeth, ii. 4, 191. 

Hubbard, William, ii. 193, 477. 

Hudson, William, 425. 

Hungerford, Earl of, 343. 

Hunniwell, Richard, ii. 298. 

Hunt, Ephraim, ii. 553. 

Huskings, 201. 

Hutchinson, Benjamin, 172; ii. 151, 197, 201. 

Hutchinson, Edward, 425. 

Hutchinson, Elisha, ii. 150. 

Hutchinson, Israel, 223, 228. 

Hutchinson, Joseph, 243, 250, 270, 285, 319; ii. 11, 28, 33, 272, 393, 545, 550. 

Hutchinson, Lydia, ii. 272. 

Hutchinson, Richard, 27, 40, 86, 137. 

Hutchinson, Thomas, History of Massachusetts, 415. 

I. 

Indians, 7, 25, 62, 286. 

Ingersoll, Hannah, 166, 261; ii. 192. 

Ingersoll, John, 40, 172; ii. 171. 

Ingersoll, Joseph, ii. 129. 

Ingersoll, Nathaniel, 35, 86, 165-179, 225, 244, 249, 251, 259, 261; autograph, 280, 288, 294, 301, 303; ordination as deacon, 305; ii. 11, 33, 42, 60, 73, 100, 112, 114, 128, 132, 140, 499. 

Ingersoll, Sarah, ii. 169. 

Ingersoll, Richard, 36, 40, 138. 

Ingersoll's Point, 138. 

Inquest, jury of, ii. 178. 

Ipswich road, 43. 

Ireson, Benjamin, ii. 208. 

Iron works, 147. 

Izard, Ann, ii. 520. 

J. 

Jackson, John, ii. 198, 223. 

Jackson, John, Jr. , ii. 198, 223. 

Jacobs, George, 198; ii. 4; arrest and examination, 164-172, 274; execution, 296, 312, 382, 480. 

Jacobs, George, Jr. , 198; ii. 187. 

Jacobs, Margaret, ii. 164, 172, 315, 349, 353, 466. 

Jacobs, Rebecca, ii. 187, 349. 

Jacobs, Thomas, ii. 207. 

James I. , 368, 375, 410. 

Jewell, John, 345. 

Jewett, Nehemiah, ii. 553. 

Joan of Arc, 343. 

Jones, Hugh, 91. 

Jones, Margaret, 415, 453. 

John Indian, ii. 2, 95, 106, 241. 

Johnson, Elizabeth, ii. 349. 

Johnson, Elizabeth, Jr. , ii. 349. 

Johnson, Francis, 40. 

Johnson, Isaac, 121, 122. 

Johnson, Samuel, 357. 

Johnson, Captain, 425. 

Jovius Paulus, 367. 

Judges, ii. 354. 

Jury to examine the bodies of prisoners, ii. 274. 

Jury of trials, ii. 284, 474. 

K. 

Kembal, John, ii. 412. 

Kenny, Henry, 251; ii. 61. 

Kepler, John, 345. 

King, Daniel, ii. 181. 

King, Joseph, 105. 

King, Margaret, 196. 

Kircher, Athanasius, 388. 

Kitchen, John, 205. 

Knight, Charles, 123. 

Knight, John, 138. 

Knight, Jonathan, ii. 177. 

Knight, Philip, ii. 177. 

Knight, Walter, 35. 

Knowlton, Joseph, ii. 220. 

L. 

Lacy, Mary, ii. 400, 480. 

Lacy, Mary, Jr. , ii. 349, 401. 

Lamb, Dr. , 348. 

Land, policy concerning, 16, 22; given up to towns, 20; clearing of, 26; disposition of, to children, 158; value of, 159. 

Landlord, 218. 

Laodicea, Council of, 375. 

Law under which the trials took place, ii. 256, 268, 360. 

Lawson, Deodat, 268-284; autograph, 280; ii. 7, 70, 73; his sermon, 76-92, 515, 525-537. 

Lawson, Thomas, 283. 

Law-suits, 232. 

Layman, Paul, 361. 

Leach, John, 141. 

Leach, Lawrence, 141. 

Leach, Robert, 129. 

Leach, Sarah, ii. 272. 

Lecture-day, 313, 450; ii. 76. 

Lewis, Mercy, ii. 4, 287; autograph, 313. 

Lewis, Rev. Mr. , 353. 

Lexington, 229. 

Lightning, 72. 

Locke, John, 372. 

Locker, George, ii. 12, 307. 

Lothrop, Ellen, 111. 

Lothrop, Thomas, 100, 103-117. 

Louder, John, ii. 264. 

Lovkine, Thomas, ii. 306. 

Low, Thomas, ii. 306. 

Luther, Martin, 344. 

M. 

Mackenzie, Sir George, 350. 

Magistrates, ii. 354. 

Manning, Jacob, ii. 142. 

Maple-sugar, 203. 

Marblehead, ii. 519. 

March, John, ii. 234. 

Marriage, early, 160; ii. 236. 

Marsh, Samuel, ii. 307. 

Marsh, Zachariah, ii. 307. 

Marshall, Benjamin, ii. 306. 

Marshall, Samuel, 122. 

Marston, Mary, ii. 349. 

Martin, Susannah, 427; arrest and examination, ii. 145; trial and execution, 268. 

Mascon, Devil of, 359. 

Mason, Thomas, ii. 267. 

Maverick, Samuel, 220. 

Maverick, Samuel, Jr. , ii. 228. 

Mather, Cotton, 112, 384, 391, 454; ii. 89, 211, 250, 257, 299, 341, 366, 487, 494, 503, 553. 

Mather, Increase, ii. 89, 299, 308, 345, 404, 494, 553. 

Mechanical occupations, 224. 

Mede, Joseph, 394. 

Medical profession, ii. 361. 

Meeting, intermission of, on the Lord's Day, 207. 

Meeting-house of Salem Village, 243, 244, 285. 

Meeting-house of Salem Village, scenes at, 263; ii. 34, 60, 94, 510. 

Meeting-house of First Church in Salem, scenes at, ii. 111, 257, 290. 

Melancthon, Philip, 344. 

Middlecot, Richard, ii. 553. 

Milton, John, 387, 467. 

Ministers, ii. 267, 362. 

Minot, Stephen, 125. 

Mirage, 386. 

Mitchel, Jonathan, 434, 437. 

Moody, Lady Deborah, 57, 183. 

Moody, Joshua, ii. 309. 

Moore, Captain, 187. 

Moore, Caleb, 188. 

Moore, Jane, 188. 

More, Henry, 400. 

Morrel, Robert, ii. 153, 191. 

Morrell, Sarah, ii. 140, 144. 

Morse, Anthony, 447. 

Morse, Elizabeth, 449-453. 

Morse, William, 438. 

Morton, Charles ii. 89. 

Mosely, Samuel, 121. 

Moulton, John, ii. 38, 336, 478. 

Moulton, Robert, 40. 

Moulton, Robert, Jr. , 40. 

Moxon, George, 419. 

N. 

Narragansett expedition, 118-135. 

Narragansett townships, 133. 

Nauscopy, 386. 

Navigation, early New-England, 440. 

Neal, Joseph, ii. 164, 274. 

Needham, Anthony, 155, 184, 226, 236; ii. 48. 

Newbury, 9. 

New-Haven Phantom-ship, 384. 

New-York Negro Plot, ii. 437. 

Newman, Antipas, 58. 

New Salem, 149. 

Newton, Thomas, ii. 254; autograph, 314. 

Nichols, Isaac, ii. 177. 

Nichols, John, 241, ii. 133. 

Nichols, Richard, 220. 

Nichols, William, 154. 

Norfolk, old county of, ii. 228. 

Norris, Edward, 57, 237. 

Norris, Edward, Jr. , 205. 

Norton, John, 423, 425; ii. 450. 

Noyes, Nicholas, 117, 271, 299; ii. 43, 48, 55, 89, 170, 172, 184, 245, 253, 269, 290, 292, 365, 485, 550; autograph, 314. 

Numa Pompilius, 330. 

Nurse, Francis, 79, 84, 91, 214, 287, 319, 320; ii. 9, 467. 

Nurse, Rebecca, 80; her arrest and examination, ii. 56-71, 111, 136; trial, 268, 270-289; excommunication, 290; execution, 292, 480, 483. 

Nurse, Samuel, 80; ii. 57, 288, 479, 485, 497, 506, 545-553. 

Nurse, Sarah, 80; ii. 287, 467. 

O. 

Obinson, Mrs. , ii. 456. 

Ocular fascination, 412; ii. 520. 

Oliver, Christian, ii. 267. 

Oliver, Mary, 420. 

Oliver, Peter, 425. 

Oliver, Thomas, 143, 191; ii. 253, 267. 

Orchard Farm, 24, 87. 

Orne, John, 57. 

Osborne, Hannah, ii. 272. 

Osborne, William, 152, 227; ii. 272. 

Osburn, Alexander, ii. 18. 

Osburn, John, ii. 19. 

Osburn, Sarah, ii. 11, 17; examination, 20; death, 32. 

Osgood, Mary, ii. 349, 404, 406. 

Osgood, William, 432. 

P. 

Page, Abraham, 139. 

Paine, Elizabeth, ii. 208. 

Paine, Stephen, ii. 208. 

Paine, Robert, 423; ii. 449. 

Palfrey, Peter, 63, 129. 

Palfrey, John G. , 125. 

Palisadoes, 31. 

Parker, Alice, ii. 179-185; trial and execution, 324. 

Parker, John, ii. 179, 181. 

Parker, John, 189; ii. 38, 48, 124. 

Parker, Mary, trial and execution, ii. 324, 325, 480. 

Parris, Elizabeth, ii. 3. 

Parris, Samuel, 170, 172, 278; autograph, 280, 286-320; ii. 1, 7, 9, 25, 31, 43, 49, 55, 92, 275, 290, 485-503, 515, 545-553. 

Parris, Thomas, 286; ii. 499. 

Parsonage of Salem Village, 243, 386; ii. 74, 466, 493. 

Parsons, Hugh, 419. 

Parsons, Mary, 418. 

Partridge, John, ii. 150. 

Payson, Edward, ii. 218, 494, 553. 

Peabody, John, ii. 475. 

Peach, Barnard, ii. 414. 

Pease, Robert, ii. 208. 

Peele, William, ii. 267. 

Peine forte et dure, ii. 338, 484. 

Peirce, Joseph, 123. 

Pendleton, Bryan, 256. 

Penn, William, 414. 

Perkins, Isaac, ii. 306. 

Perkins, Nathaniel, ii. 306. 

Perkins, Thomas, ii. 475. 

Perkins, William, 362. 

Perley, Samuel, ii. 216. 

Perley, Thomas, ii. 475. 

Peters, Elizabeth, 50-53, 57. 

Peters, Hugh, 47, 50, 51-59. 

Pettingell, Richard, 40. 

Phelps, Henry, 237. 

Phelps, John, 187. 

Phips, Sir William, 131, 451; ii. 99, 250; autograph, 314, 345. 

Phips, Spencer, ii. 482. 

Phillips, Margaret, ii. 272. 

Phillips, Samuel, 299; ii. 218, 494, 553. 

Phillips, Tabitha, ii. 272. 

Phillips, Walter, ii. 272. 

Pickering, John, 46. 

Pickering, Timothy, 46, 227. 

Pierpont, James, 384. 

Pike, John, ii. 226, 229. 

Pike, Robert, ii. 226, 228, 250, 449, 538-544. 

Pikeworth, 123; ii. 329. 

Pitcher, Moll, ii. 521. 

Pit-saw, 191. 

Poindexter, ii. 185. 

Poland, James, 188. 

Pope, Gertrude, 236. 

Pope, Joseph, 237, 238; ii. 65, 496. 

Pope Innocent VIII. , 342. 

Porter, Benjamin, 141. 

Porter, Elizabeth, ii. 272. 

Porter, Israel, 141; ii. 59, 272, 550. 

Porter, John, 40, 136. 

Porter, John, Jr. , 219. 

Porter, John, ii. 207. 

Porter, Joseph, 270, 296, 319. 

Porter, Moses, 223, 230. 

Post, Hannah, ii. 349. 

Post, Mary, ii. 349, 480. 

Powell, Caleb, 439. 

Pratt, Francis, 428. 

Prescott, Peter, 129, 316; ii. 153. 

Preston, Thomas, 80, 91; ii. 11, 57, 496, 550. 

Price, Walter, 226. 

Prince, James, ii. 17. 

Prince, Joseph, ii. 17. 

Prince, Robert, ii. 17. 

Prison, ii. 254. 

Procter, Benjamin, ii. 207. 

Procter, Elizabeth, arrest and examination, ii. 101-111; trial and condemnation, 296, 312, 466. 

Procter, John, 179, 184, 227; ii. 4, 106, 111; trial and execution, 296, 304-312; autograph, 313, 458, 480. 

Procter, Joseph, ii. 306. 

Procter, Sarah, ii. 207. 

Procter, William, ii. 208, 311. 

Procter's Corner, 49. 

Pronunciation, ii. 233. 

Pudeator, Ann, ii. 179, 185, 300; trial and execution, 324, 329. 

Pudeator, Jacob, ii. 185, 329. 

Puppets, 408, ii. 12, 266. 

Putnam, Ann, 253; ii. 5, 61, 69, 74, 177, 229, 236, 276, 282, 465, 495, 506. 

Putnam, Ann, Jr. , 214; ii. 3, 8, 40, 190; autograph, 313, 341, 511, 509-512. 

Putnam, Archelaus, 164. 

Putnam, Benjamin, 164; ii. 72, 272, 481. 

Putnam, Daniel, 164. 

Putnam, David, 227. 

Putnam, Edward, 8, 161-164, 288, 302; ii. 11, 40, 44, 60, 71, 203, 288, 465. 

Putnam, Eleazer, 132; ii. 152. 

Putnam, Enoch, 229. 

Putnam, Holyoke, 9. 

Putnam, Israel, 160, 164, 227, 238. 

Putnam, James, ii. 506. 

Putnam, Jeremiah, 229. 

Putnam, John, 34, 40, 155. 

Putnam, John, 34, 155, 157, 241, 250, 251, 258, 267, 270, 284, 287, 316, 317; ii. 272, 359, 496, 550. 

Putnam, John, Jr. , 259; ii. 4, 172, 202, 506. 

Putnam, John, 3d, ii. 506. 

Putnam, Jonathan, 269; ii. 60, 71, 201, 272. 

Putnam, Joseph, 160, 296, 319; ii. 9, 272, 457, 497. 

Putnam, Lydia, ii. 272. 

Putnam, Miriam, ii. 295. 

Putnam, Nathaniel, 84, 86, 155, 157, 186, 198, 236, 250, 288, 296;ii. 33, 128, 178, 271. 

Putnam, Orin, ii. 295. 

Putnam, Perley, 230. 

Putnam, Phinehas, ii. 295. 

Putnam, Rebecca, 267; ii. 272, 359. 

Putnam, Rufus, 227. 

Putnam, Samuel, 223. 

Putnam, Sarah, ii. 272. 

Putnam, Susannah, 143. 

Putnam, Thomas, 155, 226, 250, 251, 259; autograph, 279. 

Putnam, Thomas, 129, 225, 227, 236, 253; autograph, 279, 281, 316; ii. 3, 4, 11, 28, 55, 140, 232, 341, 464, 465, 506. 

Putnam, William Lowell, 232. 

Q. 

Queen Elizabeth, 345. 

Quick, John, 283. 

R. 

Rabbits, 209. 

Raising of a house, 201. 

Rawson, Edward, 425, 450. 

Raymond, John, 66. 

Raymond, John, 129, 134; ii. 465. 

Raymond, John W. , 232. 

Raymond, Richard, 141. 

Raymond, Thomas, 129, 133, 141. 

Raymond, William, 129, 132, 143. 

Raymond, William, Jr. , ii. 192. 

Rea, Bethiah, 113, 116. 

Rea, Daniel, 40, 113, 140. 

Rea, Daniel, Jr. , 288; ii. 272. 

Rea, Hepzibah, ii. 272. 

Rea, Joshua, 114, 140, 141, 287, 288; ii. 272, 545. 

Rea, Sarah, ii. 272. 

Read, Christopher, 123. 

Read, Thomas, 49. 

Records of Salem Village, 269, 272, 273-278. 

Redemptioners, ii. 18. 

Reed, Nicholas, 8. 

Reed, Philip, 437. 

Reed, Wilmot, arrest, ii. 208; trial and execution, 324, 325. 

Reinolds, Alexius, 91. 

Remigius, 344. 

Rice, Charles B. , ii. 513. 

Rice, Sarah, ii. 208. 

Richards, John, ii. 251, 349. 

Richardson, Mr. , 442. 

Richardson, Mary, 448. 

Ring, Jarvis, ii. 414. 

Rist, Nicholas, ii. 352. 

Roads, 43. 

Robinson, John, ii. 181, 184. 

Rogers, John, ii. 477. 

Rogers, Thomas, 443. 

Rolfe, Benjamin, 9; ii. 478. 

Roots, Susannah, ii. 207. 

Ropes, Nathaniel, 237. 

Rose, Richard, ii. 171. 

Royal Neck, 58. 

Ruck, Thomas, 57. 

Rule, Margaret, ii. 489. 

Russell, James, ii. 102. 

Russell, William, 80. 

S. 

Salem Farms, 136. 

Salem Village, 199, 216, 223, 224, 233, 234, 242, 248, 269-278, 298, 312, 321, 322; ii. 485, 513. 

Saltonstall, Nathaniel, ii. 251, 455. 

Satan, 325, 338. 

Sargent, Peter, ii. 251. 

Savage, James, 50, 384. 

Saw-pit, 191. 

Sawyers, 191. 

Sayer, Samuel, ii. 475. 

Scarlett, Benjamin, 32. 

Science, physical, 380. 

Scott, Margaret, trial and execution, ii. 324, 325. 

Scott, Reginald, 368, 410. 

Scott, Sir Walter, 335. 

Scottow, Joshua, 424, 425; ii. 298. 

Scriptures, King James's Translation of, 375. 

Scruggs, Margery, 66. 

Scruggs, Rachel, 65. 

Scruggs, Thomas, 64, 130. 

Sears, Ann, ii. 208. 

Seating the meeting-house, 217; ii. 506. 

Seely, Robert, 122. 

Settlers, provision of land for, 16. 

Sewall, Mitchel, ii. 481. 

Sewall, Samuel, ii. 102, 111, 157, 251, 441, 497. 

Sewall, Samuel, ii. 481. 

Sewall, Stephen, 57; ii. 3, 230, 384, 487, 497. 

Shakespeare, William, 379, 467. 

Sharp, Samuel, 46, 57, 388. 

Shattuck, Samuel, 193; ii. 180, 259. 

Shaw, Israel, ii. 465. 

Sheldon, Godfrey, 8. 

Sheldon, Susannah, ii. 4, 322. 

Shepard, John, ii. 465. 

Shepard, Rebecca, ii. 275, 280. 

Sherringham, Robert, 356. 

Shippen, Mr. , 261. 

Ship Tavern, ii. 254. 

Shirley, William, ii. 482. 

Shovel-board, 196, 204. 

Sibley, John, 141, 154. 

Sibley, John L. , 141. 

Sibley, Mary, ii. 95, 97. 

Sibley, Samuel, 259, 262; ii. 97, 465. 

Sibley, William, 262; ii. 18. 

Silsbee, Nathaniel, ii. 267. 

Sinclair, George, 350. 

Singletary, Jonathan, 433. 

Skelton, Samuel, 57, 85. 

Skerry, Henry, 259. 

Sleighs, 203. 

Small, Thomas, 154; ii. 19. 

Smith, George, ii. 307. 

Smith, Thomas, 105. 

Soames, Abigail, ii. 208. 

Soames, Joseph, 123. 

Spaulding, Willard, 237. 

Spencer, John, 432. 

Spenser, Edmund, 346, 365. 

Sprenger, James, 361. 

Stacy, William, ii. 263. 

Stearns, Isaac, ii. 263. 

Stileman, Elias, 40, 86. 

Stone, Samuel, ii. 307. 

Story, Joseph, ii. 440. 

Story, William, ii. 306. 

Stoughton, William, 125; ii. 157, 250, 301, 349, 355. 

Sunday patrol, 40. 

Surey Demoniac, 354. 

Sweden, King of, 344. 

Swinnerton, Esther, ii. 272. 

Swinnerton, Job, 140, 270. 

Swinnerton, Job, ii. 272. 

Swinnerton, Ruth, ii. 495. 

Switchell, Abraham, 123. 

Syllogism, 381. 

Symmes, Thomas, ii. 478. 

Symmes, Zachariah, ii. 478. 

Symonds, John, ii. 377. 

Symonds, Samuel, 433. 

Symonds, William, 433. 

T. 

Tanner, Adam, 361. 

Tarbell, John, 80, 91, 288; ii. 57, 287, 486, 497, 506, 545-553. 

Taylor, Benjamin, 182. 

Taylor, Zachary, 124. 

Tears, trial by, 409. 

Thacher, Mrs. , ii. 345, 448, 453. 

Thomasius, Christian, 373. 

Thompson, William, ii. 306. 

Tibullus, Elegy, 337. 

Titcomb, Elizabeth, 444. 

Tituba, ii. 2, 11; examination and confession, 23, 32, 255. 

Tookey, Job, arrest, ii. 208; examination, 223, 349. 

Toothacre, Mrs. , ii. 208. 

Topsfield, controversy with, 238. 

Torrey, Samuel, ii. 494, 553. 

Torrey, William, 450; ii. 553. 

Towne, Jacob, 241; ii. 56. 

Towne, John, 241; ii. 56. 

Towne, Joseph, 241; ii. 56. 

Towne, William, ii. 466. 

Towns, 20. 

Train-band, 100, 224. 

Training-field, 176, 178, 225. 

Trask, Edward, 105. 

Trask, William, 34, 64, 129. 

Travel, modes of, 43, 61, 203. 

Troopers, company of, 226. 

Trusler, Eleanor, 237. 

Tucker, John, 444. 

Tucker, Mary, 448. 

Tufts, James, 105. 

Turner, Sharon, 375. 

Twiss, William, 395. 

Tycho Brahe, 345. 

Tyler, Hannah, ii. 349, 404. 

Tyler, Mary, ii. 349, 404. 

Tyng, Edward, 125. 

U. 

Upham, Phinehas, 118, 122. 

Upton family, 155. 

Urbain Grandier, 348. 

Usher, Hezekiah, ii. 453. 

V. 

Varney, Thomas, ii. 306. 

Verrin, Hilliard, 40. 

Verrin, Joshua, 40. 

Verrin, Nathaniel, 156, 287. 

Verrin, Philip, 40, 63. 

Verrin, Philip, Jr. , 40. 

Vigilance Committee, ii. 286. 

Villalpando, Don Francisco Torreblanca, 361. 

Virgil, 336, 413. 

W. 

Wade, Thomas, ii. 337. 

Wadsworth, Benjamin, ii. 505. 

Wadsworth, Benjamin, ii. 516. 

Wagstaff, John, 370. 

Wainwright, Simon, 9. 

Walcot, Abraham, 188. 

Walcot, Jonathan, 155, 225, 270; ii. 3, 100, 140, 464, 466. 

Walcot, Jonathan, Jr. , ii. 125, 550. 

Walcot, Mary, ii. 3, 465. 

Walker, Richard, ii. 207. 

Walley, John, ii. 553. 

Ward, George A. , 98. 

Wardwell, Mary, ii. 349. 

Wardwell, Samuel, trial and execution, ii. 324, 384, 480. 

Wardwell, Sarah, ii. 349. 

Warren, Mary, ii. 4, 114, 128. 

Warren, Sarah, ii. 17. 

Wassalbe, Bridget, 191. 

Waterman, Richard, 60. 

Watson's Annals of Philadelphia, 414. 

Watts, Isaac, ii. 516. 

Watts, Jeremiah, 179. 

Way, Aaron, 145; ii. 68, 177. 

Way, William, ii. 493. 

Weld, Daniel, 57. 

Wells, town of, 256. 

Wesley, John, ii. 518. 

Westgate, John, ii. 181. 

Weston, Francis, 60. 

Wheelwright, John, ii. 228. 

Whitaker, Abraham, 429. 

White, James, ii. 306. 

White, John, 389. 

Whittier, John G. , ii. 444. 

Whittredge, Mary, ii. 187, 197, 199. 

Wierus, John, 368, 376. 

Wilds, John, ii. 128, 135. 

Wilds, Sarah, arrest and examination, ii. 135; trial and execution, 268, 480. 

Wilds, William, 143; ii. 135. 

Wilderness, opening of, 26. 

Wilkins, Benjamin, 227; ii. 173, 550. 

Wilkins, Bray, 143-146, 214, 309; ii. 173, 174. 

Wilkins, Daniel, ii. 174, 179. 

Wilkins, Hannah, 309. 

Wilkins, Henry, ii. 174. 

Wilkins, Samuel, ii. 173. 

Wilkins, Thomas, 154, 227, 316; ii. 491-495, 506, 546-553. 

Willard, John, arrest, ii. 172-179; trial and execution, 321, 480. 

Willard, Margaret, ii. 466. 

Willard, Samuel, ii. 89, 289, 309, 494, 550-553. 

Willard, Simon, ii. 210. 

Williams, Abigail, ii. 3, 7, 46, 393. 

Williams, Nathaniel, ii. 553. 

Williams, Roger, 50, 56, 68. 

Wilson, Robert, 105. 

Wilson, Sarah, ii. 404. 

Wills, 65, 75, 78, 92, 137, 162, 175, 425; ii. 304, 312, 511. 

Wills Hill, 26, 144. 

Winslow, Josiah, 119. 

Winthrop, Fitz John, 54. 

Winthrop, John, 17, 23, 39, 95, 454. 

Winthrop, John, Jr. , 39, 50, 58. 

Winthrop, Wait, 54; ii. 251, 349, 497. 

Wise, John, ii. 304, 306; autograph, 314, 477, 494. 

Witch, 402. 

Witchcraft, 337; law relating to, ii. 256, 516. 

Witch-imp, 406. 

Witch-mark, 405. 

Witch-puppets, 408. 

Witch Hill, ii. 376-380. 

Witch of Endor, 333. 

Wood, Anthony, 370. 

Woodbridge, John, 438. 

Wooden Bridge, 234. 

Woodbury, Humphrey, 141. 

Woodbury, John, 129. 

Woodbury, Nicholas, 98. 

Woodbury, Peter, 105. 

Woodbury, William, 141. 

Wooleston River, 23. 

Wolf-pits, 212. 

Wolves, 211. 

Y. 

Young, William, 51. 

INTRODUCTION. 

It is one of the distinguishing characteristics of the human being, that he loves to contemplate the scenes of the past, and desires tohave his own history borne down to the future. This, like all theother propensities of our nature, is accompanied by faculties tosecure its gratification. The gift of speech, by which the parent canconvey information to the child--the old transmit intelligence to theyoung--is an indication that it is the design of the Author of ourbeing that we should receive from those passing away the narrative oftheir experience, and communicate the results of our own to thegenerations that succeed us. All nations have, to a greater or lessdegree, been faithful to their trust in using the gift to fulfil thedesign of the Giver. It is impossible to name a people who do notpossess cherished traditions that have descended from their earlyancestors. 

Although it is generally considered that the invention of a system ofarbitrary and external signs to communicate thought is one of thegreatest and most arduous achievements of human ingenuity, yet souniversal is the disposition to make future generations acquaintedwith our condition and history, --a disposition the efficient cause ofwhich can only be found in a sense of the value of suchknowledge, --that you can scarcely find a people on the face of theglobe, who have not contrived, by some means or other, from the rudemonument of shapeless rock to the most perfect alphabetical language, to communicate with posterity; thus declaring, as with the voice ofNature herself, that it is desirable and proper that all men shouldknow as much as possible of the character, actions, and fortunes oftheir predecessors on the stage of life. 

It is not difficult to discern the end for which this disposition topreserve for the future and contemplate the past was imparted to us. If all that we knew were what is taught by our individual experience, our minds would have but little, comparatively, to exercise and expandthem, and our characters would be the result of the limited influencesembraced within the narrow sphere of our particular and immediaterelations and circumstances. But, as our notice is extended in theobservation of those who have lived before us, our materials forreflection and sources of instruction are multiplied. The virtues weadmire in our ancestors not only adorn and dignify their names, butwin us to their imitation. Their prosperity and happiness spreadabroad a diffusive light that reaches us, and brightens our condition. The wisdom that guided their footsteps becomes, at the same time, alamp to our path. The observation of the errors of their course, andof the consequent disappointments and sufferings that befell them, enables us to pass in safety through rocks and ledges on which theywere shipwrecked; and, while we grieve to see them eating the bitterfruits of their own ignorance and folly as well as vices and crimes, we can seize the benefit of their experience without paying the priceat which they purchased it. 

In the desire which every man feels to learn the history, and beinstructed by the example, of his predecessors, and in theaccompanying disposition, with the means of carrying it into effect, to transmit a knowledge of himself and his own times to hissuccessors, we discover the wise and admirable arrangement of aprovidence which removes the worn-out individual to a better country, but leaves the acquisitions of his mind and the benefit of hisexperience as an accumulating and common fund for the use of hisposterity; which has secured the continued renovation of the race, without the loss of the wisdom of each generation. 

These considerations suggest the true definition of history. It is theinstrument by which the results of the great experiment of humanaction on this theatre of being are collected and transmitted from ageto age. Speaking through the records of history, the generations thathave gone warn and guide the generations that follow. History is thePast, teaching Philosophy to the Present, for the Future. 

Since this is the true and proper design of history, it assumes anexalted station among the branches of human knowledge. Every communitythat aspires to become intelligent and virtuous should cherish it. Institutions for the promotion and diffusion of useful informationshould have special reference to it. And all people should be inducedto look back to the days of their forefathers, to be warned by theirerrors, instructed by their wisdom, and stimulated in the career ofimprovement by the example of their virtues. 

The historian would find a great amount and variety of materials inthe annals of this old town, --greater, perhaps, than in any other ofits grade in the country. But there is one chapter in our history ofpre-eminent interest and importance. The witchcraft delusion of 1692has attracted universal attention since the date of its occurrence, and will, in all coming ages, render the name of Salem notablethroughout the world. Wherever the place we live in is mentioned, thismemorable transaction will be found associated with it; and those whoknow nothing else of our history or our character will be sure toknow, and tauntingly to inform us that they know, that we hanged thewitches. 

It is surely incumbent upon us to possess ourselves of correct andjust views of a transaction thus indissolubly connected with thereputation of our home, with the memory of our fathers, and, ofcourse, with the most precious part of the inheritance of ourchildren. I am apprehensive that the community is very superficiallyacquainted with this transaction. All have heard of the Salemwitchcraft; hardly any are aware of the real character of that event. Its mention creates a smile of astonishment, and perhaps a sneer ofcontempt, or, it may be, a thrill of horror for the innocent whosuffered; but there is reason to fear, that it fails to suggest thosereflections, and impart that salutary instruction, without which thedesign of Providence in permitting it to take place cannot beaccomplished. There are, indeed, few passages in the history of anypeople to be compared with it in all that constitutes the pitiable andtragical, the mysterious and awful. The student of human nature willcontemplate in its scenes one of the most remarkable developmentswhich that nature ever assumed; while the moralist, the statesman, andthe Christian philosopher will severally find that it opens widelybefore them a field fruitful in instruction. 

Our ancestors have been visited with unmeasured reproach for theirconduct on the occasion. Sad, indeed, was the delusion that came overthem, and shocking the extent to which their bewildered imaginationsand excited passions hurried and drove them on. Still, however, manyconsiderations deserve to be well weighed before sentence is passedupon them. And while I hope to give evidence of a readiness to haveevery thing appear in its own just light, and to expose to view thevery darkest features of the transaction, I am confident of being ableto bring forward such facts and reflections as will satisfy you thatno reproach ought to be attached to them, in consequence of thisaffair, which does not belong, at least equally, to all other nations, and to the greatest and best men of their times and of previous ages;and, in short, that the final predominating sentiment their conductshould awaken is not so much that of anger and indignation as of pityand compassion. 

Let us endeavor to carry ourselves back to the state of the colony ofMassachusetts one hundred and seventy years ago. The persecutions ourancestors had undergone in their own country, and the privations, altogether inconceivable by us, they suffered during the early yearsof their residence here, acting upon their minds and characters, inco-operation with the influences of the political and ecclesiasticaloccurrences that marked the seventeenth century, had imparted agloomy, solemn, and romantic turn to their dispositions andassociations, which was transmitted without diminution to theirchildren, strengthened and aggravated by their peculiar circumstances. It was the triumphant age of superstition. The imagination had beenexpanded by credulity, until it had reached a wild and monstrousgrowth. The Puritans were always prone to subject themselves to itsinfluence; and New England, at the time to which we are referring, wasa most fit and congenial theatre upon which to display its power. Cultivation had made but a slight encroachment on the wilderness. Wide, dark, unexplored forests covered the hills, hung over thelonely roads, and frowned upon the scattered settlements. Personswhose lives have been passed where the surface has long been opened, and the land generally cleared, little know the power of a primitivewilderness upon the mind. There is nothing more impressive than itssombre shadows and gloomy recesses. The solitary wanderer is ever andanon startled by the strange, mysterious sounds that issue from itshidden depths. The distant fall of an ancient and decayed trunk, orthe tread of animals as they prowl over the mouldering branches withwhich the ground is strown; the fluttering of unseen birds brushingthrough the foliage, or the moaning of the wind sweeping over thetopmost boughs, --these all tend to excite the imagination andsolemnize the mind. But the stillness of a forest is more startlingand awe-inspiring than its sounds. Its silence is so deep as itself tobecome audible to the inner soul. It is not surprising that woodedcountries have been the fruitful fountains and nurseries ofsuperstition. 

 "In such a place as this, at such an hour, If ancestry can be in aught believed, Descending spirits have conversed with man, And told the secrets of the world unknown. "

The forests which surrounded our ancestors were the abode of amysterious race of men of strange demeanor and unascertained origin. The aspects they presented, the stories told of them, and every thingconnected with them, served to awaken fear, bewilder the imagination, and aggravate the tendencies of the general condition of things tofanatical enthusiasm. 

It was the common belief, sanctioned, as will appear in the course ofthis discussion, not by the clergy alone, but by the most learnedscholars of that and the preceding ages, that the American Indianswere the subjects and worshippers of the Devil, and their powwows, wizards. 

In consequence of this opinion, the entire want of confidence andsympathy to which it gave rise, and the provocations naturallyincident to two races of men, of dissimilar habits, feelings, andideas, thrown into close proximity, a state of things was soon broughtabout which led to conflicts and wars of the most distressing andshocking character. A strongly rooted sentiment of hostility andhorror became associated in the minds of the colonists with the nameof Indian. There was scarcely a village where the marks of savageviolence and cruelty could not be pointed out, or an individual whosefamily history did not contain some illustration of the stealth, themalice or the vengeance of the savage foe. In 1689, John Bishop, andNicholas Reed a servant of Edward Putnam; and, in 1690, GodfreySheldon, were killed by Indians in Salem. In the year 1691, about sixmonths previous to the commencement of the witchcraft delusion, thecounty of Essex was ordered to keep twenty-four scouts constantly inthe field, to guard the frontiers against the savage enemy, and togive notice of his approach, then looked for every hour with thegreatest alarm and apprehension. 

Events soon justified the dread of Indian hostilities felt by thepeople of this neighborhood. Within six years after the witchcraftdelusion, incursions of the savage foe took place at various points, carrying terror to all hearts. In August, 1696, they killed or tookprisoners fifteen persons at Billerica, burning many houses. InOctober of the same year, they came upon Newbury, and carried off andtomahawked nine persons; all of whom perished, except a lad whosurvived his wounds. In 1698, they made a murderous and destructiveassault upon Haverhill. The story of the capture, sufferings, andheroic achievements of Hannah Dustin, belongs to the history of thisevent. It stands by the side of the immortal deed of Judith, and hasno other parallel in all the annals of female daring and prowess. Onthe 3d of July, 1706, a garrison was stormed at night in Dunstable;and Holyoke, a son of Edward Putnam, with three other soldiers, waskilled. He was twenty-two years of age. In 1708, seven hundredAlgonquin and St. Francis Indians, under the command of Frenchofficers, fell again upon Haverhill about break of day, on the 29th ofAugust; consigned the town to conflagration and plunder; destroyed alarge amount of property; massacred the minister Mr. Rolfe, thecommander of the post Captain Wainwright, together with nearly fortyothers; and carried off many into captivity. On this occasion, a troopof horse and a foot company from Salem Village rushed to the rescue;the then minister of the parish, the Rev. Joseph Green, seized his gunand went with them. They pursued the flying Indians for somedistance. So deeply were the people of Haverhill impressed by thevalor and conduct of Mr. Green and his people, that they sent a letterof thanks, and desired him to come and preach to them. He compliedwith the invitation, spent a Sunday there, and thus gave them anopportunity to express personally their gratitude. On other occasions, he accompanied his people on similar expeditions. 

These occurrences show that the fears and anxieties of the colonistsin reference to Indian assaults were not without grounds at the periodof the witchcraft delusion. They were, at that very time, hanging likea storm-cloud over their heads, soon to burst, and spread death anddestruction among them. 

There was but little communication between the several villages andsettlements. To travel from Boston to Salem, for instance, which theordinary means of conveyance enable us to do at present in less thanan hour, was then the fatiguing, adventurous, and doubtful work of anentire day. 

It was the darkest and most desponding period in the civil history ofNew England. The people, whose ruling passion then was, as it has eversince been, a love for constitutional rights, had, a few years before, been thrown into dismay by the loss of their charter, and, from thattime, kept in a feverish state of anxiety respecting their futurepolitical destinies. In addition to all this, the whole sea-coast wasexposed to danger: ruthless pirates were continually prowling alongthe shores. Commerce was nearly extinguished, and great losses hadbeen experienced by men in business. A recent expedition againstCanada had exposed the colonies to the vengeance of France. 

The province was encumbered with oppressive taxes, and weighed down bya heavy debt. The sum assessed upon Salem to defray the expenses ofthe country at large, the year before the witchcraft prosecutions, was£1, 346. 1_s. _ Besides this, there were the town taxes. The wholeamounted, no doubt, inclusive of the support of the ministry, to aweight of taxation, considering the greater value of money at thattime, of which we have no experience, and can hardly form an adequateconception. The burden pressed directly upon the whole community. There were then no great private fortunes, no moneyed institutions, noconsiderable foreign commerce, few, if any, articles of luxury, and nolarge business-capitals to intercept and divert its pressure. It wasborne to its whole extent by the unaided industry of a population ofextremely moderate estates and very limited earnings, and almostcrushed it to the earth. 

The people were dissatisfied with the new charter. They were becomingthe victims of political jealousies, discontent, and animosities. Theyhad been agitated by great revolutions. They were surrounded byalarming indications of change, and their ears were constantlyassailed by rumors of war. Their minds were startled and confounded bythe prevalence of prophecies and forebodings of dark and dismalevents. At this most unfortunate moment, and, as it were, to crown thewhole and fill up the measure of their affliction and terror, it wastheir universal and sober belief, that the Evil One himself was, in aspecial manner, let loose, and permitted to descend upon them withunexampled fury. 

The people of Salem participated in their full share of the gloom anddespondency that pervaded the province, and, in addition to that, hadtheir own peculiar troubles and distresses. Within a short time, thetown had lost almost all its venerable fathers and leading citizens, the men whose councils had governed and whose wisdom had guided themfrom the first years of the settlement of the place. Only those whoare intimately acquainted with the condition of a community of simplemanners and primitive feelings, such as were the early New-Englandsettlements, can have an adequate conception of the degree to whichthe people were attached to their patriarchs, the extent of theirdependence upon them, and the amount of the loss when they wereremoved. 

In the midst of this general distress and local gloom and depression, the great and awful tragedy, whose incidents, scenes, and characters Iam to present, took place. 

PART FIRST. 

SALEM VILLAGE. 

[Illustration]

PART FIRST. 

SALEM VILLAGE. 

It is necessary, before entering upon the subject of the witchcraftdelusion, to give a particular and extended account of the immediatelocality where it occurred, and of the community occupying it. This isdemanded by justice to the parties concerned, and indispensable to acorrect understanding of the transaction. No one, in truth, canrightly appreciate the character of the rural population of the townsfirst settled in Massachusetts, without tracing it to its origin, andtaking into view the policy that regulated the colonization of thecountry at the start. 

"The Governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay in New England"possessed, by its charter from James the First, dated Nov. 3, 1620, and renewed by Charles the First, March 4, 1629, the entiresovereignty over all the territory assigned to it. Some few conditionsand exceptions were incorporated in the grant, which, in the event, proved to be merely nominal. The company, so far as the crown andsovereignty of England were concerned, became absolute owner of thewhole territory within its limits, and exercised its powersaccordingly. It adopted wise and efficient measures to promote thesettlement of the country by emigrants of the best description. Itgave to every man who transported himself at his own charge fiftyacres of land, and lots, in distinction from farms, to those whoshould choose to settle and build in towns. In 1628, Captain JohnEndicott, one of the original patentees, was sent over to superintendthe management of affairs on the spot, and carry out the views of thecompany. On the 30th of April, 1629, the company, by a full and freeelection, chose said Endicott to be "Governor of the Plantation in theMassachusetts Bay, " to hold office for one year "from the time heshall take the oath, " and gave him instructions for his government. Inreference to the disposal of lands, they provided that persons "whowere adventurers, " that is, subscribers to the common stock, to theamount of fifty pounds, should have two hundred acres of land, and, atthat rate, more or less, "to the intent to build their houses, and toimprove their labors thereon. " Adventurers who carried families withthem were to have fifty acres for each member of their respectivefamilies. Other provisions were made, on the same principles, to meetthe case of servants taken over; for each of whom an additional numberof acres was to be allowed. If a person should choose "to build onthe plot of ground where the town is intended to be built, " he was tohave half an acre for every fifty pounds subscribed by him to thecommon stock. A general discretion was given to Endicott and hiscouncil to make grants to particular persons, "according to theircharge and quality;" having reference always to the ability of thegrantee to improve his allotment. Energetic and intelligent men, having able-bodied sons or servants, even if not adventurers, were tobe favorably regarded. Endicott carried out these instructionsfaithfully and judiciously during his brief administration. In themean time, it had been determined to transfer the charter, and thecompany bodily, to New England. Upon this being settled, JohnWinthrop, with others, joined the company, and he was elected itsgovernor on the 29th of October, 1629. On the 12th of June, 1630, hearrived in Salem, and held his first court at Charlestown on the 28thof August. 

There was some irregularity in these proceedings. The charter fixed acertain time, "yearly, once in the year, for ever hereafter, " for theelection of governor, deputy-governor, and assistants. Matthew Cradockhad been elected accordingly, on the 13th of May, 1629, governor ofthe company "for the year following. " He presided at the General Courtof the company when Winthrop was elected governor. There does notappear to have been any formal resignation of his office by Cradock. In point of fact, the charter made no provision for a resignation ofoffice, but only for cases where a vacancy might be occasioned bydeath, or removal by an act of the company. It would have been moreregular for the company to have removed Cradock by a formal vote; butthe great and weighty matter in which they were engaged preventedtheir thinking of a mere formality. Cradock had himself conceived theproject they had met to carry into effect, and labored to bring itabout. He vacated the chair to his successor, on the spot. Stillforgetting the provisions of the charter, they declared Winthropelected "for the ensuing year, to begin on this present day, " the 20thof October, 1629. By the language of the charter, he could only beelected to fill the vacancy "in the room or place" of Cradock; thatis, for the residue of the official year established by the expressprovision of that instrument, namely, until the "last Wednesday inEaster term" ensuing. All usage is in favor of this construction. Theterms of the charter are explicit; and, if persons chosen to fillvacancies during the course of a year could thus be commissioned tohold an entire year from the date of their election, the provisionfixing a certain day "yearly" for the choice of officers would beutterly nullified. Whether this subsequently occurred to Winthrop andhis associates is not known; but, if it did, it was impossible forthem to act in conformity to the view now given; for, in the ensuing"last Wednesday of Easter term, " he was at sea, in mid ocean, and theseveral members of the company dispersed throughout his fleet. When hearrived in Salem, he found Endicott--who, in the records of thecompany before its transfer to New England, is styled "the Governorbeyond the seas"--with his year of office not yet expired. The companyhad not chosen another in his place, and his commission still heldgood. It was so evident that the vote extending the term of Winthrop'stenure to a year from the day on which he was chosen, Oct. 20, 1629, was illegal, that when that year expired, in October, 1630, no motionwas made to proceed to a new election. In the mean time, however, Endicott's year had expired; and, for aught that appears, there wasnot, for several months, any legal governor or government at all inthe colony. When the next "last Wednesday of Easter term" came round, on the 18th of May, 1631, Winthrop was chosen governor, as the recordsays, "according to the meaning of the patent;" and all went onsmoothly afterwards. If the difficulty into which they had got wasapprehended by Winthrop, Endicott, or any of their associates, theywere wise enough to see that nothing but mischief could arise fromtaking notice of it; that no human ingenuity could disentangle thesnarl; and that all they could do was to wait for the lapse of time todrift them through. The conduct of these two men on the occasion wastruly admirable. Endicott welcomed Winthrop with all the honors due tohis position as governor; opened his doors to receive him and hisfamily; and manifested the affectionate respect and veneration withwhich, from his earliest manhood to his dying day, Winthrop everinspired all men in all circumstances. Winthrop performed theceremony at Endicott's marriage. They each went about his ownbusiness, and said nothing of the embarrassments attached to theirofficial titles or powers. After a few months, Winthrop held hiscourts, as though all was in good shape; and Endicott took his seat asan assistant. They proved themselves sensible, high-minded men, oftrue public spirit, and friends to each other and to the country, which will for ever honor them both as founders and fathers. Theyentered into no disputes--and their descendants never should--aboutwhich was governor, or which first governor. 

The disposal of lands, at the expiration of Endicott's delegatedadministration, passed back into the hands of the company, and wasconducted by the General Court upon the policy established at itsmeetings in London. On the 3d of March, 1635, the General Courtrelinquished the control and disposal of lands, within the limits oftowns, to the towns themselves. After this, all grants of lands inSalem were made by the people of the town or their own local courts. The original land policy was faithfully adhered to here, as itprobably was in the other towns. 

The following is a copy of the Act:--

 "Whereas particular towns have many things which concern only themselves, and the ordering of their own affairs, and disposing of businesses in their own towns, it is therefore ordered, that the freemen of any town, or the major part of them, shall only have power to dispose of their own lands and woods, with all the privileges and appurtenances of the said towns, to grant lots, and make such orders as may concern the well ordering of their own towns, not repugnant to the laws and orders here established by the General Court; as also to lay mulcts and penalties for the breach of these orders, and to levy and distress the same, not exceeding the sum of twenty shillings; also to choose their own particular officers, as constables, surveyors of the high-ways, and the like; and because much business is like to ensue to the constables of several towns, by reason they are to make distress, and gather fines, therefore that every town shall have two constables, where there is need, that so their office may not be a burthen unto them, and they may attend more carefully upon the discharge of their office, for which they shall be liable to give their accounts to this court, when they shall be called thereunto. "

The reflecting student of political science will probably regard thisas the most important legislative act in our annals. Towns had existedbefore, but were scarcely more than local designations, or convenientdivisions of the people and territories. This called them into beingas depositories and agents of political power in its mightiestefficacy and most vital force. It remitted to the people theiroriginal sovereignty. Before, that sovereignty had rested in the handsof a remote central deputation; this returned it to them in theirprimary capacity, and brought it back, in its most important elements, to their immediate control. It gave them complete possession andabsolute power over their own lands, and provided the machinery formanaging their own neighborhoods and making and executing their ownlaws in what is, after all, the greatest sphere of government, --thatwhich concerns ordinary, daily, immediate relations. It gave to thepeople the power to do and determine all that the people can do anddetermine, by themselves. It created the towns as the solid foundationof the whole political structure of the State, trained the people asin a perpetual school for self-government, and fitted them to be theguardians of republican liberty and order. 

Large tracts were granted to men who had the disposition and the meansfor improving them by opening roads, building bridges, clearingforests, and bringing the surface into a state for cultivation. Men ofproperty, education, and high social position, were thus made to leadthe way in developing the agricultural resources of the country, andgiving character to the farming interest and class. In cases where menof energy, industry, and intelligence presented themselves, if notadventurers in the common stock, with no other property than theirstrong arms and resolute wills, particularly if they had able-bodiedsons, liberal grants were made. Every one who had received a town lotof half an acre was allowed to relinquish it, receiving, in exchange, a country lot of fifty acres or more. Under this system, a populationof a superior order was led out into the forest. Farms quickly spreadinto the interior, seeking the meadows, occupying the arable land, andespecially following up the streams. 

I propose to illustrate this by a very particular enumeration ofinstances, and by details that will give us an insight of thepersonal, domestic, and social elements that constituted the conditionof life in the earliest age of New England, particularly in that partof the old township of Salem where the scene of our story is laid. Ishall give an account of the persons and families who first settledthe region included in, and immediately contiguous to, Salem Village, and whose children and grandchildren were actors or sufferers in, orwitnesses of, the witchcraft delusion. I am able, by the map, to showthe boundaries, to some degree of precision, of their farms, and thespots on or near which their houses stood. 

The first grant of land made by the company, after it had got fairlyunder way, was of six hundred acres to Governor Winthrop, on the 6thof September, 1631, "near his house at Mystic. " The next was to thedeputy-governor, Thomas Dudley, on the 5th of June, 1632, of twohundred acres "on the west side of Charles River, over against the newtown, " now Cambridge. The next, on the 3d of July, 1632, was threehundred acres to John Endicott. It is described, in the record, as"bounded on the south side with a river, commonly called the Cow HouseRiver, on the north side with a river, commonly called the Duck River, on the east with a river, leading up to the two former rivers, knownby the name of Wooleston River, and on the west with the main land. "The meaning of the Indian word applied to this territory was"Birch-wood. " At the period of the witchcraft delusion, and for sometime afterwards, "Cow House River" was called "Endicott River. "Subsequently it acquired the name of "Waters River. "

This grant constituted what was called "the Governor's Orchard Farm. "In conformity with the policy on which grants were made, Endicott atonce proceeded to occupy and improve it, by clearing off the woods, erecting buildings, making roads, and building bridges. Hisdwelling-house embraced in its view the whole surrounding country, with the arms of the sea. From the more elevated points of his farm, the open sea was in sight. A road was opened by him, from the head oftide water on Duck, now Crane, River, through the Orchard Farm, andround the head of Cow House River, to the town of Salem, in onedirection, and to Lynn and Boston in another. A few years afterwards, the town granted him two hundred acres more, contiguous to the westernline of the Orchard Farm. After this, and as a part of thetransaction, the present Ipswich road was made, and the old roadthrough the Orchard Farm discontinued. This illustrates the policy ofthe land grants. They were made to persons who had the ability to layout roads. The present bridge over Crane River was probably built byEndicott and the parties to whom what is now called the Plains, one ofthe principal villages of Danvers, had been granted. The tract grantedby the town was popularly called the "Governor's Plain. " By giving, inthis way, large tracts of land to men of means, the country was openedand made accessible to settlers who had no pecuniary ability to incurlarge outlays in the way of general improvements, but had therequisite energy and industry to commence the work of subduing theforest and making farms for themselves. To them, smaller grants weremade. 

The character of the population, thus aided at the beginning insettling the country, cannot be appreciated without giving some ideaof what it was to open the wilderness for occupancy and cultivation. This is a subject which those who have always lived in other thanfrontier towns do not perhaps understand. 

How much of the land had been previously cleared by the aboriginaltribes, it may be somewhat difficult to determine. They were butslightly attached to the soil, had temporary and movable habitations, and no bulky implements or articles of furniture. They were nomadic intheir habits. On the coast and its inlets, their light canoes gaveeasy means of transportation, for their families and all that theypossessed, from point to point, and, further inland, over interveningterritory, from river to river. They probably seldom attempted, inthis part of the country, to clear the rugged and stony uplands. Insome instances, they removed the trees from the soft alluvial meadows, although it is probable that in only a very few localities they wouldhave attempted such a persistent and laborious undertaking. There werelarge salt marshes, and here and there meadows, free from timber. There were spots where fires had swept over the land and the treesdisappeared. On such spots they probably planted their corn; the landbeing made at once fertile and easily cultivable, by the effects ofthe fires. Near large inland sheets of water, having no outletspassable by their canoes, and well stocked with fish, they sometimeshad permanent plantations, as at Will's Hill. With such slightexceptions, when the white settler came upon his grant, he found itcovered by the primeval wilderness, thickly set with old trees, whoseroots, as well as branches, were interlocked firmly with each other, the surface obstructed with tangled and prickly underbrush; the soilbroken, and mixed with rocks and stones, --the entire face of thecountry hilly, rugged, and intersected by swamps and winding streams. 

Among all the achievements of human labor and perseverance recorded inhistory, there is none more herculean than the opening of aNew-England forest to cultivation. The fables of antiquity are allsuggestive of instruction, and infold wisdom. The earliest inhabitantsof every wooded country, who subdued its wilderness, were truly a raceof giants. 

Let any one try the experiment of felling and eradicating a singletree, and he will begin to approach an estimate of what the firstEnglish settler had before him, as he entered upon his work. It wasnot only a work of the utmost difficulty, calling for the greatestpossible exercise of physical toil, strength, patience, andperseverance, but it was a work of years and generations. The axe, swung by muscular arms, could, one by one, fell the trees. There wasno machinery to aid in extracting the tough roots, equal, often, insize and spread, to the branches. The practice was to level by the axea portion of the forest, managing so as to have the trees fall inward, early in the season. After the summer had passed, and the fallentimber become dried, fire would be set to the whole tract covered byit. After it had smouldered out, there would be left charred trunksand stumps. The trunks would then be drawn together, piled in heaps, and burned again. Between the blackened stumps, barley or some othergrain, and probably corn, would be planted, and the lapse of yearswaited for, before the roots would be sufficiently decayed to enableoxen with chains to extract them. Then the rocks and stones would haveto be removed, before the plough could, to any considerable extent, beapplied. As late as 1637, the people of Salem voted twenty acres, tobe added within two years to his previous grant, to RichardHutchinson, upon the condition that he would, in the mean time, "setup ploughing. " The meadow to the eastward of the meeting-house, seenin the head-piece of this Part, probably was the ground whereploughing was thus first "set up. " The plough had undoubtedly beenused before in town-lots, and by some of the old planters who hadsecured favorable open locations along the coves and shores; but itrequired all this length of time to bring the interior country into acondition for its use. 

The opening of a wilderness combined circumstances of interest whichare not, perhaps, equalled in any other occupation. It is impossibleto imagine a more exhilarating or invigorating employment. Itdeveloped the muscular powers more equally and effectively than anyother. The handling of the axe brought into exercise every part of themanly frame. It afforded room for experience and skill, as well asstrength; it was an athletic art of the highest kind, and awakenedenergy, enterprise, and ambition; it was accompanied with sufficientdanger to invest it with interest, and demand the most carefuljudgment and observation. He who best knew how to fell a tree wasjustly looked upon as the most valuable and the leading man. To bringa tall giant of the woods to the ground was a noble and perilousachievement. As it slowly trembled and tottered to its fall, it wasall-important to give it the right direction, so that, as it came downwith a thundering crash, it might not be diverted from its expectedcourse by the surrounding trees and their multifarious branches, orits trunk slide off or rebound in an unforeseen manner, scatteringfragments and throwing limbs upon the choppers below. Accidents often, deaths sometimes, occurred. A skilful woodman, by a glance at thesurrounding trees and their branches, could tell where the tree onwhich he was about to operate should fall, and bring it unerringly tothe ground in the right direction. There was, moreover, danger fromlurking savages; and, if the chopper was alone in the deep woods, fromthe prowling solitary bear, or hungry wolves, which, going in packs, were sometimes formidable. There were elements also, in the work, thatawakened the finer sentiments. The lonely and solemn woods are God'sfirst temples. They are full of mystic influences; they nourish thepoetic nature; they feed the imagination. The air is elastic, andevery sound reverberates in broken, strange, and inexplicableintonations. The woods are impregnated with a health-giving anddelightful fragrance nowhere else experienced. All the arts of modernluxury fail to produce an aroma like that which pervades a primitiveforest of pines and spruces. Indeed, all trees, in an originalwilderness, where they exist in every stage of growth and decay, contribute to this peculiar charm of the woods. It was not only amanly, but a most lively, occupation. When many were working near eachother, the echoes of their voices of cheer, of the sharp and ringingtones of their axes, and of the heavy concussions of the fallingtimber, produced a music that filled the old forests with life, andmade labor joyous and refreshing. 

The length of time required to prepare a country covered by awilderness, on a New-England soil, for cultivation, may be estimatedby the facts I have stated. A long lapse of years must intervene, after the woods have been felled and their dried trunks and branchesburned, before the stumps can be extracted, the land levelled, thestones removed, the plough introduced, or the smooth green fields, which give such beauty to agricultural scenes, be presented. Animmense amount of the most exhausting labor must be expended in theprocess. The world looks with wonder on the dykes of Holland, thewall of China, the pyramids of Egypt. I do not hesitate to say thatthe results produced by the small, scattered population of theAmerican colonies, during their first century, in tearing up awilderness by its roots, transforming the rocks, with which thesurface was covered, into walls, opening roads, building bridges, andmaking a rough and broken country smooth and level, converting asterile waste into fertile fields blossoming with verdure and grainsand fruitage, is a more wonderful monument of human industry andperseverance than them all. It was a work, not of mere hired laborers, still less of servile minions, but of freemen owning, or winning bytheir voluntary and cheerful toil, the acres on which they labored, and thus entitling themselves to be the sovereigns of the country theywere creating. A few thousands of such men, with such incentives, wrought wonders greater than millions of slaves or serfs ever haveaccomplished, or ever will. 

It was not, therefore, from mere favoritism, or a blind subserviencyto men of wealth or station, that such liberal grants of land weremade to Winthrop, Dudley, Endicott, and others, but for various wiseand good reasons, having the welfare and happiness of the wholepeople, especially the poorer classes, in view. In illustration of theone now under consideration, a few facts may be presented. They willshow the amount of labor required to bring the "Orchard Farm" intocultivation, and which must have been procured at a large outlay inmoney by the proprietor. In the court-files are many curious papers, in the shape of depositions given by witnesses in suits of variouskinds, arising from time to time, showing that large numbers of hiredmen were kept constantly at work. Nov. 10, 1678, Edmund Grover, seventy-eight years old, testified, "that, above forty-five yearssince, I, this deponent, wrought much upon Governor Endicott's farm, called Orchard, and did, about that time, help to cut and cleave aboutseven thousand palisadoes, as I remember, and was the first that madeimprovement thereof, by breaking up of ground and planting ofIndian-corn. " The land was granted to Endicott in July, 1632; and thework in which Grover, with others, was engaged, commenced undoubtedlyforthwith. Palisadoes were young trees, of about six inches indiameter at the butt, cut into poles of about ten feet in length, sharpened at the larger end, and driven into the ground; those thatwere split or cloven were used as rails. In this way, lots were fencedin. In some cases, the upright posts were placed close together, aspalisades in fortifications, to prevent the escape of domesticanimals, and as a safeguard against depredations upon the youngcattle, sheep, and poultry, by bears, wolves, foxes, the loup-cervier, or wild-cat, with which the woods were infested. Grover seems to havewrought on the Orchard Farm for a short time. We find, that, a fewyears after the point to which his testimony goes back, he had a farmof his own. Some wrought there for a longer time, and were permanentretainers on the farm. In 1635, the widow Scarlett apprenticed her sonBenjamin, then eleven years of age, to Governor Endicott. Thefollowing document, recorded in Essex Registry of Deeds, tells hisstory:--

 "To all christian people to whom these presents shall come, I, Benjamin Scarlett of Salem, in New England, sendeth Greeting--Know ye, that I, the said Benjamin Scarlett, having lived as a servant with Mr. John Endicott, Esq. , sometimes Governor in New England, and served him near upon thirty years, for, and in consideration whereof, the said Governor Endicott gave unto me, the said Benjamin Scarlett, a certain tract of land, in the year 1650, being about 10 acres, more or less, the which land hath ever since been possessed by me, the said Benjamin Scarlett, and it lyeth at the head of Cow House River, bounded on the north with the land of Mr. Endicott called Orchard Farm, on the South with the high way leading to the salt water, on the West with the road way leading to Salem, on the East with the salt water, which tract of land was given to me, as aforesaid, during my life, and in case I should leave no issue of my body, to give it to such of his posterity as I should see cause to bestow it upon; Know ye, therefore, that I, the said Benjamin Scarlett, for divers considerations me thereunto moving, have given, granted, and by these presents do give and grant, assign, sett over, and bestow the aforesaid tract of land, with all the improvements I have made thereon, both by building, fencing, or otherwise, unto Samuel Endicott, second son to Zerubabel Endicott deceased, and unto Hannah his wife, to have and to hold the said ten acres of land, more or less, with all the privileges and appurtenances thereunto belonging, unto the said Samuel Endicott and Hannah his wife, to his and her own proper use and behoof forever; and after their decease I give the said tract of land to their son Samuel Endicott. In case he should depart this life without issue, then to be given to the next heir of the said Samuel and Hannah. --In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal. --Dated the ninth of January one thousand six hundred and ninety one. --BENJAMIN SCARLETT, his mark. "

It is to be observed, that Governor Endicott had died twenty-sixyears, and his son Zerubabel seven years, before the date of theforegoing deed. No writings had passed between them in reference tothe final disposition Scarlett was conditionally to make of theestate. There were no living witnesses of the original understanding. But the old man was true to the sentiments of honor and gratitude. Themaster to whom he had been apprenticed in his boyhood had been kindand generous to him, and he was faithful to the letter and spirit ofhis engagement. He evidently made a point to have the language of thedeed as strong as it could be. He did not leave the matter to besettled by a will, but determined to enjoy, while living, thesatisfaction of being true to his plighted faith. He was known, in hislater years, as "old Ben Scarlett. " He did not feel ashamed to callhimself a servant. But humble and unpretending as he was, I feel apride in rescuing his name from oblivion. Old Ben Scarlett will forever hold his place among nature's nobles, --honest men. 

The extent to which Endicott went in improving his lands is shown inthe particular department which gave the name to his original grant. In 1648, he bought of Captain Trask two hundred and fifty acres ofland, in another locality, giving in exchange five hundredapple-trees, of three years' growth. Such a number of fruit-trees ofthat age, disposable at so early a period, could only be the result ofa great expenditure of labor and money. So many operations going onunder his direction and within his premises made his farm a school, inwhich large numbers were trained to every variety of knowledge neededby an original settler. The subduing of the wilderness; the breakingof the ground; the building of bridges, stone-walls, "palisadoes, "houses, and barns; the processes of planting; the introduction of allsuitable articles of culture; the methods best adapted to thepreparation of the rugged soil for production; the rearing of abundantorchards and bountiful crops; the smoothing and levelling of lands, and the laying-out of roads, --these were all going at once, and it wasquite desirable for young men to work on his farm, before going outdeeper into the wilderness to make farms for themselves. There weremany besides Grover who availed themselves of the advantage. JohnPutnam was a large landholder, and an original grantee; but we findhis youngest son, John, attached to Endicott's establishment, andworking on his farm about the time of his maturity. In a deposition incourt, in a land case of disputed boundaries, August, 1705, "JohnPutnam, Sr. , of full age, testifieth and saith that--being a retainerin Governor Endicott's family, about fifty years since, and beingintimately acquainted with the governor himself and with his son, Mr. Zerubabel Endicott, late of Salem, deceased, who succeeded in hisfather's right, and lived and died on the farm called Orchard Farm, inSalem--the said Governor Endicott did oftentimes tell this deponent, "&c. The same John Putnam, in a deposition dated 1678, says that he wasthen fifty years old, and that, thirty-five years before, he was atMr. Endicott's farm, and went out to a certain place called "VineCove, " where he found Mr. Endicott; and he testifies to a conversationthat he heard between Mr. Endicott and one of his men, Walter Knight. I mention these things to show that a lad of fifteen, a son of aneighbor of large estate in lands, was an intimate visitor at theOrchard Farm; and that, when he became of age, before entering uponthe work of clearing lands of his own, given by his father, he went as"a retainer" to work on the governor's farm. He went as a voluntarylaborer, as to a school of agricultural training. This was done onother farms, first occupied by men who had the means and theenterprise to carry on large operations. It gave a high character, intheir particular employment, to the first settlers generally. 

I cannot leave this subject of Endicott on his farm, withoutpresenting another picture, drawn from a wilderness scene. In 1678, Nathaniel Ingersol, then forty-five years of age, in a depositionsworn to in court, describes an incident that occurred on the easternend of the Townsend Bishop farm as laid out on the map, when he wasabout eleven years of age. His father, Richard Ingersol, had leasedthe farm. It was contiguous to Endicott's land, and controversies ofboundary arose, which subsequently contributed to aggravate the feudsand passions that were let loose in the fury of the witchcraftproceedings. Nathaniel Ingersol says, --

 "This deponent testifieth, that, when my father had fenced in a parcel of land where the wolf-pits now are, the said Governor Endicott came to my father where we were at plough, and said to my father he had fenced in some of the said Governor's land. My father replied, then he would remove the fence. No, said Governor Endicott, let it stand; and, when you set up a new fence, we will settle in the bounds. "

This statement is worthy of being preserved, as it illustrates thecharacter of the two men, exhibiting them in a most honorable light. The gentlemanly bearing of each is quite observable. Ingersolmanifests an instant willingness to repair a wrong, and set the matterright; Endicott is considerate and obliging on a point where men aremost prone to be obstinate and unyielding, --a conflict of land rights:both are courteous, and disposed to accommodate. Endicott was governorof the colony, and a large conterminous landowner; Ingersol was ahusbandman, at work with his boys on land into which their labor hadincorporated value, and with which, for the time being, he wasidentified. But Endicott showed no arrogance, and assumed noauthority; Ingersol manifested no resentment or irritation. If asimilar spirit had been everywhere exhibited, the good-will andharmony of neighborhoods would never have been disturbed, and therecords of courts reduced to less than half their bulk. 

To his dying day, John Endicott retained a lively interest inpromoting the welfare of his neighbors in the vicinity of the OrchardFarm. 

Father Gabriel Druillettes was sent by the Governor of Canada, in1650, to Boston, in a diplomatic character, to treat with theGovernment here. He kept a journal, during his visit, from which thefollowing is an extract: "I went to Salem to speak to the SieurIndicatt who speaks and understands French well, and is a good friendof the nation, and very desirous to have his children entertain thissentiment. Finding I had no money, he supplied me, and gave me aninvitation to the magistrates' table. " Endicott had undoubtedlyreceived a good education. His natural force of character had beenbrought under the influence of the knowledge prevalent in his day, andinvigorated by an experience and aptitude in practical affairs. Thereis some evidence that he had, in early life, been a surgeon orphysician. 

He was a captain in the military service before leaving England. Although he was the earliest who bore the title of governor here, having been deputed to exercise that office by the governor andcompany in England, and subsequently elected to that station for agreater length of time than any other person in our history, had beencolonel of the Essex militia, commandant of the expedition against theIndians at Block Island, and, for several years, major-general, at thehead of the military forces of the colony, the title of captain wasattached to him, more or less, from beginning to end; and it is asingular circumstance, that it has adhered to the name to this day. His descendants early manifested a predilection for maritime life. During the first half of the present century, many of them wereshipmasters. In our foreign, particularly our East-India, navigation, the title has clung to the name; so much so, that the story is told, that, half a century ago, when American ships arrived at Sumatra orJava, the natives, on approaching or entering the vessels to ascertainthe name of the captain, were accustomed to inquire, "Who is theEndicott?" The public station, rank, and influence of GovernorEndicott required that he should first be mentioned, in describing theelements that went to form the character of the original agriculturalpopulation of this region. 

The map shows the farm of Emanuel Downing. The lines are substantiallycorrect, although precise accuracy cannot be claimed for them, as thepoints mentioned in this and other cases were marked trees, heaps ofstones, or other perishable or removable objects, and no survey orplot has come down to us. A collation of conterminous grants orsubsequent conveyances, with references in some of them to permanentobjects, enables us to approximate to a pretty certain conclusion. This gentleman was one of the most distinguished of the earlyNew-England colonists. He was a lawyer of the Inner Temple. Hemarried, in the first instance, a daughter of Sir James Ware, a personof great eminence in the learned lore of his times. His second wifewas Lucy, sister of Governor Winthrop of Massachusetts, who was bornJuly 9, 1601. They were married, April 10, 1622. There seems to havebeen a very strong attachment between Emanuel Downing and his brotherWinthrop; and they went together, with their whole heart, into theplan of building up the colony. They devoted to it their fortunes andlives. Downing is supposed to have arrived at Boston in August, 1638, with his family. On the 4th of November, he and his wife were admittedto the Church at Salem. So great had been the value of his services inbehalf of the colony, in defending its interests and watching over itswelfare before leaving England, that he was welcomed with the utmostcordiality to his new home. His nephew, John Winthrop, Jr. , afterwardsGovernor of Connecticut, was associated with John Endicott toadminister to him the freeman's oath. The General Court granted himsix hundred acres of land. He was immediately appointed a judge of thelocal court in Salem, and, for many years, elected one of its twodeputies to the General Court. In anticipation of his arrival in thecountry, the town of Salem, on the 16th of July, granted him fivehundred acres. He afterwards purchased the farm on which he seems tohave lived, for the most part, until he went to England in 1652. Thecondition of public affairs, and his own connection with them, detained him in the mother-country much of the latter part of hislife. While in this colony, he was indefatigable in his exertions tosecure its prosperity. His wealth and time and faculties wereliberally and constantly devoted to this end. 

The active part taken by Mr. Downing in the affairs of the settlementis illustrated in the following extract from the Salem town records:--

 "At a general Town meeting, held the 7th day of the 5th month, 1644--ordered that two be appointed every Lord's Day, to walk forth in the time of God's worship, to take notice of such as either lye about the meeting house, without attending to the word and ordinances, or that lye at home or in the fields without giving good account thereof, and to take the names of such persons, and to present them to the magistrates, whereby they may be accordingly proceeded against. The names of such as are ordered to this service are for the 1st day, Mr. Stileman and Philip Veren Jr. 2d day, Philip Veren Sr. And Hilliard Veren. 3d day, Mr. Batter and Joshua Veren. 4th day, Mr. Johnson and Mr. Clark. 5th day, Mr. Downing and Robert Molton Sr. 6th day, Robert Molton Jr. And Richard Ingersol. 7th day, John Ingersol and Richard Pettingell. 8th day, William Haynes and Richard Hutchinson. 9th day, John Putnam and John Hathorne. 10th day, Townsend Bishop and Daniel Rea. 11th day, John Porter and Jacob Barney. "

Each patrol, on concluding its day's service, was to notify thesucceeding one; and they were to start on their rounds, severally, from "Goodman Porter's near the Meeting House. "

The men appointed to this service were all leading characters, reliable and energetic persons. It was a singular arrangement, andgives a vivid idea of the state of things at the time. Its design wasprobably, not merely that expressed in the vote of the town, but alsoto prevent any disorderly conduct on the part of those not attendingpublic worship, and to give prompt alarm in case of fire or an Indianassault. The population had not then spread out far into the country;and the range of exploration did not much extend beyond the settlementin the town. None but active men, however, could have performed theduty thoroughly, and in all directions, so as to have kept the wholecommunity under strict inspection. 

Mr. Downing probably expended liberally his fortune and time inimproving his farm, upon which there were, at least, fourdwelling-houses prior to 1661, and large numbers of men employed. Hewas a ready contributor to all public objects. His education had beensuperior and his attainments in knowledge extensive. He was of anenlightened spirit, and strove to mitigate the severity of theprocedures against Antinomians and others. He seems to have had aningenious and enterprising mind. At a General Court held at Boston, Sept. 6, 1638, it was voted that, "Whereas Emanuel Downing, Esq. , hathbrought over, at his great charges, all things fitting for takingwild fowl by way of duck-coy, this court, being desirous to encouragehim and others in such designs as tend to the public good, " &c. , orders that liberty shall be given him to set up his duck-coy withinthe limits of Salem; and all persons are forbidden to molest him inhis experiments, by "shooting in any gun within half a mile of theponds, " where, by the regulations of the town, he shall be allowed toplace the decoys. The court afterwards granted to other towns libertyto set up duck-coys, with similar privileges. What was the particularstructure of the contrivance, and how far it succeeded in operation, is not known; but the thing shows the spirit of the man. He at oncetook hold of his farm with energy, and gathered workmen upon it. Winthrop in his journal has this entry, Aug. 2, 1645:--

 "Mr. Downing having built a new house at his farm, he being gone to England, and his wife and family gone to the church meeting on the Lord's day, the chimney took fire and burned down the house, and bedding, apparel and household, to the value of 200 pounds. "

This proves that his family resided on the farm; and it indicates, that, when he first occupied it, he had only such a house as couldhave been seasonably put up at the start, but that a more commodiousone had been erected at his leisure: the expression "having built anew house" appears to carry this idea. On his return from England, heundoubtedly built again, and had other houses for his workmen andtenants; for we find that one of them, in 1648, was allowed to keep anordinary, "as Mr. Downing's farm, on the road between Lynn andIpswich, was a convenient place" for such an accommodation totravellers. Public travel to and from those points goes over that sameroad to-day. That it was so early laid out is probably owing to thefact, that such men as Emanuel Downing were on its route, and JohnWinthrop, Jr. , at Ipswich. Downing called his farm "Groton, " in dearremembrance of his wife's ancestral home in "the old country. "

Originally, travel was on a track more interior. The opening of roadsdid not begin until after the more immediate and necessary operationsof erecting houses and bringing the land, on the most available spotsnear them at the points first settled, under culture. Originally, communication from farm to farm, through the woods, was by marking thetrees, --sometimes by burning and blackening spots on their sides, andsometimes by cutting off a piece of the bark. The traveller found hisway step by step, following the trees thus marked, or "blazed, " as itwas called whichever method had been adopted. When the branches andbrush were sufficiently cleared away, horses could be used. At placesrendered difficult by large roots, partly above ground, interceptingthe passage, or by rough stones, the rider would dismount, and leadthe horse. From this, it was called a "bridle-path. " After the way hadbecome sufficiently opened for ox-carts or other vehicles to pass, itwould begin to receive the name of a road. On reaching a cleared andfenced piece of land, the traveller would cross it, opening andclosing gates, or taking down and replacing bars, as the case mightbe. There were arrangements among the settlers, and, before long, actsof the General Court, regulating the matter. This was the origin ofwhat were called "press-roads, " or "farm-roads, " or "gate-roads. " Whena proprietor concluded it to be for his interest to do so, he wouldfence in the road on both sides where it crossed his land, and removethe gates or bars from each end. Ultimately, the road, if convenientfor long travel, would be fenced in for a great distance, and become apermanent "public highway. " In all these stages of progress, it wouldbe called a "highway. " The fee would remain with the severalproprietors through whose lands it passed; and, if travel shouldforsake it for a more eligible route, it would be discontinued, andthe road-track, enclosed in the fields to which it originallybelonged, be obliterated by the plough. Many of the "highways, " bywhich the farmers passed over each other's lands to get to themeeting-house or out to public roads, in 1692, have thus disappeared, while some have hardened into permanent public roads used to this day. When thus fully and finally established, it became a "town road, " andif leading some distance into the interior, and through other towns, was called a "country road. " The early name of "path" continued sometime in use long after it had got to be worthy of a more pretentioustitle. The old "Boston Path, " by which the country was originallypenetrated, long retained that name. It ran through the southern andwestern part of Salem Village by the Gardners, Popes, Goodales, Flints, Needhams, Swinnertons, Houltons, and so on towards Ipswich andNewbury. 

On the 30th of September, 1648, Governor Winthrop, writing to his sonJohn, says "they are well at Salem, and your uncle is now beginning todistil. Mr. Endicott hath found a copper mine in his own ground. Mr. Leader hath tried it. The furnace runs eight tons per week, and theirbar iron is as good as Spanish. " Whatever may be thought by some ofthe logic which infers that "all is well" in Salem, because they arebeginning "to distil;" and however little has, as yet, resulted herefrom the discovery of copper-mines, or the manufacture of iron, theforegoing extract shows the zeal and enthusiasm with which thewealthier settlers were applying themselves to the development of thecapabilities of the country. 

Mr. Downing seems to have resided permanently on his farm, and to havebeen identified with the agricultural portion of the community. Hishouse-lot in the town bounded south on Essex Street, extending fromNewbury to St. Peter's Street. He may not, perhaps, have built upon itfor some time, as it long continued to be called "Downing's Field. "Two of his daughters married sons of Thomas Gardner: Mary marriedSamuel; and Ann, Joseph. They came into possession of the "DowningField. " Mary was the mother of John, the progenitor of a large branchof the Gardner family. Mr. Downing had another large lot in the town, which, on the 11th of February, 1641, was sold to John Pickering, described in the deed as follows: "All that parcel of ground, lyingbefore the now dwelling-house of the said John Pickering, late in theoccupation of John Endicott, Esq. , with all the appurtenancesthereunto belonging, abutting on the east and south on the rivercommonly called the South River, and on the west on the land ofWilliam Hathorne, and on the north on the Town Common. " The deed issigned by Lucy Downing, and by Edmund Batter, acting for her husbandin his absence. On the 10th of February, 1644, he indorsed thetransaction as follows: "I do freely agree to the sale of the saidField in Salem, made by my wife to John Pickering: witness my hand, "&c. The attesting witnesses were Samuel Sharpe and William Hathorne. This land was then called "Broad Field. " On his estate, thus enlarged, Pickering, a few years afterwards, built a house, still standing. Theestate has remained, or rather so much of it as was attached to thehomestead, in that family to this day, and is now owned and occupiedby John Pickering, Esq. , son of the eminent scholar and philologist ofthat name, and grandson of Colonel Timothy Pickering, of Revolutionaryfame, --the trusted friend of Washington. 

Emanuel Downing was the father of Sir George Downing, one of the firstclass that graduated at Harvard College, --a man of extraordinarytalents and wonderful fortunes. After finishing his collegiatecourse, in 1642, he studied divinity, probably under the direction ofHugh Peters; went to the West Indies, acting as chaplain in thevessel; preached and received calls to settle in several places; wenton to England; entered the parliamentary service as chaplain to aregiment; was rapidly drawn into notice, and promoted from point topoint, until he became scoutmaster-general in Cromwell's army. Thisoffice seems to have combined the functions of inspector andcommissary-general, and head of the reconnoitering department. In1654, he was married to Frances, sister of Viscount Morpeth, afterwards Earl of Carlisle; thus uniting himself with "the blood ofall the Howards, " one of the noblest families in England. The nuptialswere celebrated with great pomp, an epithalamium in Latin, &c. Allthis, within eleven years after he took his degree at Harvard, issurely an extraordinary instance of rising in the world. He was amember of Parliament for Scotland. Cromwell sent him to France ondiplomatic business, and his correspondence in Latin from that courtwas the beginning of a career of great services in that line. He wassoon commissioned ambassador to the Hague, then the great court inEurope. Thurlow's state papers show with what marvellous vigilance, activity, and efficiency he conducted, from that centre, thediplomatic affairs of the commonwealth. At the restoration of themonarchy, he made the quickest and the loftiest somersault in allpolitical history. It was done between two days. He saw Charles theSecond at the Hague, on his way to England to resume his crown: andthe man who, up to that moment, had been one of the most zealoussupporters of the commonwealth, came out next morning as an equallyzealous supporter of the king. He accompanied this wonderful exploitby an act of treachery to three of his old associates, --includingColonel Oakey, in whose regiment he had served as chaplain, --whichcost them their lives. He was forthwith knighted, and his commissionas ambassador renewed. After a while, he returned to England; wentinto Parliament from Morpeth, and ever after the exchequer was in hishands. By his knowledge, skill, and ability, he enlarged the financialresources of the country, multiplied its manufactures, and extendedits power and wealth. He was probably the original contriver of thepolicy enforced in the celebrated Navigation Act, having suggested itin Cromwell's time. By that single short act of Parliament, Englandbecame the great naval power of the world; her colonial possessions, however widely dispersed, were consolidated into one vast fountain ofwealth to the imperial realm; the empire of the seas was fixed on animmovable basis, and the proud Hollander compelled to take down thebesom from the mast-head of his high-admiral. 

Sir George Downing did one thing in favor of the power of the people, in the British system of government, which may mitigate the resentmentof mankind for his execrable seizure and delivery to the royalvengeance of Oakey, Corbett, and Barkstead. He introduced intoParliament and established the principle of Specific Appropriations. The House of Commons has, ever since, not only held the keys of thetreasury, but the power of controlling expenditures. The fortune ofSir George, on the failure of issue in the third generation, went tothe foundation of Downing College, in Cambridge, England. It amountedto one hundred and fifty thousand pounds sterling. It is notimprobable, that Downing Street, in London, owes its name to the greatdiplomatist. 

This remarkable man spent his later youth and opening manhood on SalemFarms. In his college vacations and intervals of study, he partook, perhaps, in the labors of the plantation, mingled with the ruralpopulation, and shared in their sports. The crack of his fowling-piecere-echoed through the wild woods beyond Procter's Corner; he tendedhis father's duck-coys at Humphries' Pond, and angled along the clearbrooks. It is an observable circumstance, as illustrating thetransmission of family traits, that the same ingenious activity andversatility of mind, which led Emanuel Downing, while carrying on themultifarious operations of opening a large farm in the forest, presiding in the local court at Salem, and serving year after year inthe General Court as a deputy, to contrive complicated machinery fortaking wild fowl and getting up distilleries, re-appeared in his son, on the broader field of the manufactures, finances, and foreignrelations of a great nation. 

A tract of three hundred acres, next eastward of the Downing farm, wasgranted to Thomas Read. He became a freeman in 1634, was a member ofthe Salem Church in 1636, received his grant the same year, and wasacknowledged as an inhabitant, May 2, 1637. The farm is now occupiedand owned by the Hon. Richard S. Rogers. It is a beautiful andcommanding situation, and attests the taste of its originalproprietor. Mr. Read seems to have had a passion for military affairs. In 1636, he was ensign in a regiment composed of men from Saugus, Ipswich, Newbury, and Salem, of which John Endicott was colonel, andJohn Winthrop, Jr. , lieutenant-colonel. In 1647, he commanded acompany. During the civil wars in England, he was attracted back tohis native country. He commanded a regiment in 1660, and held hisplace after the Restoration. He died about 1663. 

Our antiquarians were long at a loss to understand a sentence in oneof Roger Williams's letters to John Winthrop, Jr. , in which he says, "Sir, you were not long since the son of two noble fathers, Mr. JohnWinthrop and Mr. Hugh Peters. " How John Winthrop, Jr. , could be a sonof Hugh Peters was the puzzle. Peters was not the father of either ofWinthrop's two wives; and there was nothing in any family records ormemorials to justify the notion. On the contrary, they absolutelyprecluded it. By the labors and acumen of the Hon. James Savage andMr. Charles Deane, of Cambridge, who have no superiors in grapplingwith such a difficulty, its solution seems, at last, to be reached. "After long fruitless search, " Mr. Savage has expressed a convictionthat Mr. Deane has "acquired the probable explication. " The clue wasthus obtained: Mr. Savage says, "This approach to explanation isgained from 'the Life and Death of Hugh Peters, by William Yonge, Dr. Med. London. 1663, ' a very curious and more scarce tract. " The factsdiscovered are that Peters taught a free school at Maldon, in Essex;and that a widow lady with children and an estate of two or threehundred pounds a year befriended him. She was known as "MistressRead. " Peters married her. The second wife of John Winthrop, Jr. , wasElizabeth, daughter of Colonel Read, of Essex. By marrying Mrs. Read, Peters became the step-father of the younger Winthrop's wife; and, bythe usage of that day, he would be called Winthrop's father. 

A few additional particulars, in reference to Peters and our SalemRead, may shed further light on the subject. While a prisoner in theTower of London, awaiting the trial which, in a few short days, consigned him to his fate, Peters wrote "A Dying Father's Last Legacyto an only Child, " and delivered it to his daughter just before hisexecution. This is one of the most admirable productions of genius, wisdom, and affection, anywhere to be found. In it he gives acondensed history of his life, which enables us to settle somequestions, which have given rise to conflicting statements, and keptsome points in his biography in obscurity. In the first place, thetitle proves that he had, at the time of his death, no other child. Inthe course of it, he tells his daughter, that, when he was fourteenyears of age, his mother, then a widow, removed with him to Cambridge, and connected him with the University there. His elder brother hadbeen sent to Oxford for his education. After residing eight years inCambridge, he took his Master's degree, and then went up to London, where he was "struck with the sense of his sinful estate by a sermonhe heard under Paul's, which was about forty years since, which textwas the _burden of Dumah or Idumea_, and stuck fast. This made me togo into Essex; and after being quieted by another sermon in thatcountry, and the love and labors of Mr. Thomas Hooker, I therepreached, there married with a good gentlewoman, till I went to Londonto ripen my studies, not intending to preach at all. " He then relatesthe circumstances which subsequently led him again to engage inpreaching. He is stated to have been born in 1599: his death was in1660. Putting together these dates and facts, it becomes evident thathe could not have been more than twenty-two years of age when hemarried "Mistress Read. " The "Last Legacy" shows, not merely in themanner in which he speaks of her, --"a good gentlewoman, "--but, in itsexpress terms, that she was not the mother of the "only child" to whomit was addressed. "Besides your mother, " he states that he had had "agodly wife before. " There is no indication that there were children bythe earlier marriage. If there were, they died young. He married, forhis second wife, Deliverance Sheffield, at Boston, in March, 1639. 

His first wife, the time of whose death is unknown, had left thechildren by her former husband in his hands and under his care. Heevidently cherished the memory of the "good gentlewoman of Essex" withthe tenderest and most sacred affection. She had not only been thedear wife of his youth, but her property placed him above want. Nowonder that the strongest attachment existed between him and herchildren. John Winthrop, Jr. , and his wife, called him father, notmerely in conformity with custom, being their step-father in point offact, but with the fondness and devotion of actual children. It was onaccount of this intimate and endeared connection, and in considerationof the pecuniary benefit he had derived from his marriage to themother of the younger Winthrop's wife, that he made arrangements, incase he should not return to America, that his Salem property shouldgo to her and her husband. Having married a second wife, and therebeing issue of said marriage, he would not have alienated soconsiderable a part of his property from the legal heir without somegood and sufficient reason. The foregoing view of the case explainsthe whole. The solution of the mystery which had enveloped RogerWilliams's language is complete. Elizabeth, the daughter of the secondmarriage, to whom the "Last Legacy" was addressed, was baptized in theFirst Church at Salem, on the 8th of March, 1640. It does not appear, that, during her subsequent life, there was any intimacy, or evenacquaintance, between her and the Winthrops, as there was no groundfor it, she being in no way connected with them. 

May not Thomas Read, of Salem, have been a son of Colonel Read, ofMaldon in Essex, and a brother of the wife of the younger Winthrop?Peters says, in the "Last Legacy, " "Many of my acquaintances, goingfor New England, had engaged me to come to them when they sent, whichaccordingly I did. " Thomas Read came over some time before him; so didJohn Winthrop, Jr. , and wife. They were the same as children to him. They sent for him, and he came. After it was ascertained anddetermined that Peters should settle in Salem, Read joined the churchhere, and became a full inhabitant. Peters located his grant of landin sight of Read's residence, on the next then unappropriatedterritory, at a distance of about two and a half miles. When Readreturned to England, he left his property here in the care of theWinthrops. Wait Winthrop, as the agent and attorney of his heirs, soldit to Daniel Eppes. If, as I conjecture, Thomas Read was a son ofColonel Read, of Essex, his coming here with Peters, and hisconnection with the Winthrops, are accounted for. His strongpredilection for military affairs was natural in a son of a colonel ofthe English army. It led him back to the mother-country, on the firstsound of the great civil war reaching these shores, and raised him tothe rank he finally attained. The conjecture that he was a brother ofthe wife of the younger Winthrop is favored by the fact, that her son, Fitz John Winthrop, was a captain in Read's regiment, at the time ofthe restoration of the Stuarts. 

During the short period of the residence of Hugh Peters in America, professional duties, and the extent to which his great talents werecalled upon in ecclesiastical and political affairs, in all parts ofthe colony, left him but little opportunity to attend to histwo-hundred-acre grant. It was to the north of the present village ofDanvers Plains, on the eastern side and adjoining to Frost-Fish Brook. The history of this grant confirms the supposition of his particularconnection with the family of the younger Winthrop. It seems that ithad not been formally laid out by metes and bounds while Peters washere. Owing to this circumstance, perhaps, it escaped confiscation atthe time of his condemnation and execution. Some years afterwards, June 4, 1674, a committee of the town laid out the grant "to Mr. Peters. " The record of this transaction says, "The land is in thepossession of John Corwin. " Captain John Corwin had married, in May, 1665, Margaret, daughter of John Winthrop, Jr. She survived herhusband, and sold the same land, May 22, 1693, to "Henry Brown, Jr. , of Salisbury, yeoman. " These facts show that this portion of Mr. Peters's lands did go, according to the agreement when he leftAmerica, to the family of John Winthrop, Jr. 

Whether he had erected a house on this grant is not known. From hischaracteristic energy, activity, and promptitude, it is probable thathe had begun to clear it. In agriculture, as in every thing else, hegave a decisive impulse. It is stated that he had a particular designto attempt the culture of hemp. He introduced many implements oflabor, and started new methods of improvement. He disclosed to theproducer of agricultural growths the idea of raising what the land wasmost capable of yielding in abundance, in greater quantities than wereneeded for local consumption, and finding for the surplus an outsidemarket. He is allowed to have introduced the coasting and foreigntrade on an intelligent and organized basis, and to have promotedship-building and the export of the products of the forests and thefields generally to the Southern plantations, the West Indies, andeven more distant points. If he had remained longer in the country, the farming interests, and the settlers in what was afterwards calledSalem Village, within which his tract was situated, would have felthis great influence. As it was, he undoubtedly did much to inspire azeal for improvement. His town residence was on the south-westerncorner of Essex and Washington Street, then known as "Salem Corner, "where the office of the Horse-railroad Company now is. The lot was aquarter of an acre. Roger Williams probably had resided there, andsold to Peters, who was his successor in the ministry of the FirstChurch, and whose attorney sold it to Benjamin Felton, in 1659. Therange of ground included within what are now Washington, Essex, Summer, and Chestnut Streets, and extending to the South River, as itwas before any dam or mills had been erected over or across it, was abeautiful swell of land, with sloping surfaces, intersected by a creekfrom near the foot of Chestnut Street to its junction with the SouthRiver under the present grade of Mill Street. To the south of thecorner, occupied successively by Roger Williams and Hugh Peters, RalphFogg, the Lady Deborah Moody, George Corwin, Dr. George Emory, ThomasRuck, Samuel Skelton, Endicott, Pickering, Downing, and Hathorne, eachhad lots, extending in order to the foot of what is now Phelps Street. Most, if not all of them, had houses on their lots. Elder Sharp hadwhat was called "Sharp's Field, " bordering on the north side of EssexStreet, extending from Washington to North Streets. His house was atthe north corner of Lynde and Washington Streets. Edmund Batter, HenryCook, Dr. Daniel Weld, Stephen Sewall, and Edward Norris, wereafterwards on his land. Hugh Peters also owned the lot, consisting ofa quarter of an acre, on the north-eastern corner of Essex andWashington Streets, now occupied by what is known as Stearns'sBuilding, and was preparing to erect a house upon it when he was sentto England. His attorney sold it, in 1652, to John Orne, the founderof the family of that name. 

The daughter of Mr. Peters came over to America shortly after hisdeath, bringing with her her mother, who, for many years, had beensubject to derangement. They were kindly received; and some of hisproperty, particularly a valuable farm in the vicinity of Marblehead, which the daughter sold to the American ancestor of the Devereuxfamily, was recovered from the effect of his attainder. She probablysoon went back to England, where she spent her days. Papers on file inthe county court show that Elizabeth Barker, widow, "daughter of Mr. Hugh Peters, " was living, in March, 1702, in good health, at Deptford, Kent, in the immediate vicinity of London, and had been living therefor about forty years. 

In consequence, perhaps, of the intimate connection between Mr. Petersand the family of John Winthrop, Jr. , the name of the latter is to beadded to the cluster of eminent men who, at that time, were drawn toreside in Salem. He was here, it is quite certain, from 1638 to 1641, if not for a longer period. There are indications of his presence asearly as March of the former year, when he was appointed with Endicottto administer the freeman's oath to his uncle Downing. On the 25th ofthe next June, he had liberty to set up a salt-house at Royal Neck, onthe east side of Wooleston River. There he erected a dwelling-houseand other buildings, as appears by the depositions of sundry personsin a land suit about thirty years afterwards, who state that theyworked for him, and were conversant with him there for several years. His first experiments and enterprises in the salt-manufacture, whichhe subsequently conducted on a very extensive scale in Connecticut, were performed at Royal Neck. His daughter, the widow successively ofAntipas Newman and Zerubabel Endicott, in the suit just mentioned, recovered possession of that property, comprising forty acres, withthe buildings and improvements. In 1646, John Winthrop, Jr. , accompanied by a brother of Hugh Peters, Rev. Thomas Peters fromCornwall in England, began a plantation at Pequot River; and Trumbull, in his "History of Connecticut, " says that "Mr. Thomas Peters was thefirst minister of Saybrook. " The fortunes and families of Hugh Petersand John Winthrop, Jr. , seem all along to have been linked together. 

Downing, Read, and Peters, three of the original planters of SalemFarms, were drawn back to England and kept there by the engrossinginterest which the wonderful revolution then breaking out in thatkingdom could not but awaken in such minds as theirs. Here andeverywhere, a great check was given to the early progress of thecountry by the turn of the tide which carried such men back toEngland, and prevented others from coming over. If the Parliament hadnot attempted to arrest the usurpations of the crown at that time, andthe Stuarts been suffered to establish an absolute monarchy, the eyesand hearts of all free spirits would have remained fixed on America, and a perpetual stream of emigration brought over, for generations andfor ever, thousands upon thousands of such men as came at thebeginning. The effects that would have been thus produced in Americaand in England, in accelerating the progress of society here, andsinking it into debasement there; and thereby upon the fortunes ofmankind the world over, is a subject on which a meditative andphilosophical mind may well be exercised. 

But, although these men were lost, others are worthy of beingenumerated, in forming an estimate of the elements that went to makethe character of the people, a chapter in whose history, of awfulimport, we are preparing ourselves to explore. 

Francis Weston was a leading man at the very beginning. In 1634, withRoger Conant and John Holgrave, he represented Salem in the firstHouse of Deputies ever assembled. His land grant was some littledistance to the west of the meeting-house of the village. He must havebeen a person of more than ordinary liberality of spirit; for hediscountenanced the intolerance of his age, and kept his mind open toreceive truth and light. He did not conceal his sympathy with thosewho suffered for entertaining Antinomian sentiments. He was ordered toquit the colony in 1638. For the same offence, his wife, who probablyhad refused to go, was placed in the stocks "two hours at Boston andtwo at Salem, on a lecture day. " Weston, having ventured back, fiveyears afterwards, was put in irons, and imprisoned to hard labor. But, as he stood to his principles, and there was danger to be apprehendedfrom his influence, he was again driven out of the colony. 

Richard Waterman came over from England in 1629, recommended toGovernor Endicott by the governor and deputy in London. He was a notedhunter. "His chief employment, " says the letter introducing him toEndicott, "will be to get you good venison. " A land grant was assignedhim near Davenport's Hill. But he, too, had a spirit that resisted thesevere and arbitrary policy of the times. He became a dissenter fromthe prevalent creed, and sympathized with those who sufferedoppression. In 1664, he was brought before the court, condemned toimprisonment, and finally banished. Weston and Waterman subsequentlywere conspicuous in Rhode-Island affairs. While residing in thevillage, the latter probably devoted himself to the opening of hisland, and the pursuit of game through the forests. I find but onenotice of him as connected with public affairs. 

For some years, the settlements were necessarily confined to theshores of bays or coves, and the banks of rivers. There were nowheel-carriages of any kind, for transportation or travel, untilsomething like roads could be made; and that was the work of time. Afew horses had been imported; but it was long before they could beraised to meet the general wants, or come much into use. Every thinghad to be water-borne. The only vehicles were boats or canoes, mostlythe latter. There were two kinds of canoes. Large white-pine logs werescooped or hollowed out, and wrought into suitable shape, about twoand a half feet in breadth and twenty in length. These were oftenquite convenient and serviceable, but not to be compared with theIndian canoes, which were made of the bark of trees, wrought withgreat skill into a beautiful shape. The birch canoe was an admirablestructure, combining elements and principles which modern navalarchitecture may well study to imitate. In lightness, rapidity, freedom and ease of motion, it has not been, and cannot be, surpassed. Its draft, even when bearing a considerable burden, was so slight, that it would glide over the shallowest bars. It was strong, durable, and easily kept in repair. Although dangerous to the highest degreeunder an inexperienced and unskilful hand, no vessel has ever beensafer when managed by persons trained to its use. The cool andquick-sighted Indian could guide it, with his exquisitely mouldedpaddle, in perfect security, through whirling rapids and over heavyseas, around headlands and across bays. The settlers early suppliedthemselves with canoes, by which to thread the interior streams, andcross from shore to shore in the harbors. One great advantage of thelight canoe, before roads were opened through the woods, was, that itcould be unloaded, and borne on the shoulders across the land, at anypoint, to another stream or lake, thus cutting off long curves, andgetting from river to river. The lading would be transported inconvenient parcels, the canoe launched, loaded, and again be floatedon its way. Canoes soon came into universal use, particularly in thisneighborhood. Wood, in his "New-England's Prospect, " speaking ofSalem, says, "There be more canowes in this town than in all the wholePatent, every household having a water horse or two. " It was soimportant for the public safety to have them kept in good condition, that the town took the matter in hand. The quarterly court recordshave the following entry under the date of June 27, 1636:--

 "It was ordered and agreed, that all the canoes of the north side of the town shall be brought the next second day, being the 4th day of the 5th month, about 9 o'clock, A. M. , unto the cove of the common landing place of the North River, by George Harris his house--And that all the canoes of the south side are to be brought before the port-house in the South River, at the same time, then and there to be viewed by J. Holgrave, P. Palfrey, R. Waterman, R. Conant, P. Veren, or the greater number of them. And that there shall be no canoe used (upon penalty, of forty shillings, to the owner thereof) than such as the said surveyors shall allow of and set their mark upon; and if any shall refuse or neglect to bring their canoes to the said places at the time appointed, they shall pay for said fault 10 shillings. "

The names of the men associated with Waterman prove that he was rankedamong the chief citizens of the town. The austere manners of the age, among communities like that established here; the exclusion, at thattime, by inexorable laws, of many forms of amusement; and the generalsombre aspect of society, kept down the natural exhilaration of lifeto such a degree, that, when the pressure was occasionally removed, the whole people bounded into the liveliest outbursts of gladexcitement. It was no doubt a gala day. Ceremony, sport, andfestivity, in all their forms, took full effect. The surveyorsperformed their functions with the utmost display of authority, examined the canoes with the gravest scrutiny, and affixed theirmarks with all due formality. A light, graceful, and most picturesquefleet swarmed, from all directions, to the appointed rendezvous. Theharbor glittered with the flashing paddles, and was the scene of swiftraces and rival feats of skill, displaying manly strength and agility. It must have been an aquatic spectacle of rare gayety and beauty, notsurpassed nor equalled in some respects, when, more than a centuryafterwards, the "Grand Turk" or the "Essex" frigate was launched, orwhen Commodore Forbes, still later, swept into our peaceful waterswith his boat flotilla. It was the first Fourth of July evercelebrated in America. 

Thomas Scruggs was an early inhabitant of Salem; often represented thetown as deputy in the General Court; was one of the judges of thelocal court, and always recognized among the rulers of the town. InJanuary, 1636, he received a grant of three hundred acres on thesouth-west limits of its territory. The next month, an exchange tookplace, which is thus recorded in the town-book of grants: "It wasordered, that, whereas Mr. Scruggs had a farm of three hundred acresbeyond Forest River, and that Captain Trask had one of two hundredacres beyond Bass River, and Captain Trask freely relinquishing hisfarm of two hundred acres, it was granted unto Mr. Thomas Scruggs, andhe thereupon freely relinquished his farm of three hundred acres. "This brought Scruggs upon the Salem Farms, between Bass River and thegreat pond, Wenham Lake. The real object in making this arrangementwas to advance a project which the leading people of Salem at thattime had much at heart. They were very desirous to have the collegeestablished on the tract relinquished by Scruggs. What would have beenthe effect of placing it there, in the immediate neighborhood of thesea-shore, in full view of the spacious bay, its promontories, islands, and navigation, is a question on which we may speculate atour leisure. The effort failed: Captain Trask and Mr. Scruggs had doneall they could to accomplish it, and gave their energies to thewelfare of the community in other directions. From the little that isrecorded of Scruggs, it is quite evident that he was an intelligentand valuable citizen. The event that brought his career as a publicman to a close proves that his mind was enlightened, liberal, andindependent; that he was in advance of the times in which he lived. When the bitter and violent persecution of the celebrated AnneHutchinson, on account of her Antinomian sentiments, took place, Mr. Scruggs disapproved and denounced it. He gave his whole influence, earnestly and openly, against such attempts to suppress freedom ofinquiry and the rights of conscience. He, with others in Salem, wasproscribed, disarmed, and deprived of his public functions. He appearsto have been suffered to remain unmolested on his estate, and diedthere in 1654. He had but one child, Rachel; and the name, as derivedfrom him, became extinct. The inventory of his property is dated onthe 24th of June of that year. The items mentioned in it amount to£244. 10_s. _ 2_d. _ Considering the rates of value at that time, itwas a large property. At the same date, an agreement is recorded bywhich his widow, Margery, conveys to her son-in-law, John Raymond, allher real estate, upon these conditions: She to have the use of herhouse during her life, the bedding, and other "household stuff;" andhe to pay her five pounds "in hand, " twenty pounds per annum, and fivepounds "at the hour of her death. " This was an ample provision, inthose times, for her comfort while she lived, and for her funeralcharges. I do not remember to have found this last point arranged for, in such a form of expression, in any other instance. 

William Alford was an early settler. He was a member of the numerousand wealthy society, or guild, of Skinners, in the city of London, andprobably came here with the view of establishing an extensive trade infurs. He received accordingly, in 1636, a grant of two hundred acres, including what was for some time called Alford's Hill, afterwards LongHill, now known as Cherry Hill. It is owned and occupied by R. P. Waters, Esq. Alford sympathized in religious views with his neighborScruggs, and with him was subjected to censure, and disarmed by orderof the General Court. He sold his lands to Henry Herrick, and left thejurisdiction. 

One of the most enlightened, and perhaps most accomplished, men amongthe first inhabitants of Salem Village, was Townsend Bishop. He wasadmitted a freeman in 1635. The next year, he appears on the list ofmembers of the Salem Church. He was one of the judges of the localcourt, and, almost without intermission from his first coming here, adeputy to the General Court. In 1645, as his attention had been led tothe subject, he conceived doubts in reference to infant baptism; andit was noticed that he did not bring forward a child, recently born, to the rite. Although himself on the bench, and ever before the objectof popular favor and public honors, he was at once brought up, andhanded over for discipline. The next year, he sold his estates, andprobably removed elsewhere. He appears no more in our annals. Where hewent, I have not been able to learn. It is to be hoped that he foundsomewhere a more congenial and tolerant abode. It is evident that hecould not breathe in an atmosphere of bigotry; and it was difficult tofind one free from the miasma in those days. 

Five of the most valuable of the first settlers of thevillage--Weston, Waterman, Scruggs, Alford, and Bishop--were thusearly driven into exile, or subdued to silence, by the stern policy onwhich the colony was founded. It is an error to characterize this asreligious bigotry. It was not so much a theological as a politicalpersecution. Its apparent form was in reference to tenets of faith, but the policy was deeper than this. Any attempt to make opposition tothe existing administration was treated with equal severity, whatevermight be the subject on which it ventured to display itself. 

The men who sought this far-off "nook and corner of the world, "crossing a tempestuous and dangerous ocean, and landing on the shoresof a wilderness, leaving every thing, however dear and valuable, behind, came to have a country and a social system for themselves andof themselves alone. Their resolve was inexorable not to allow themother-country, or the whole outside world combined, to interfere withthem. And it was equally inexorable not to suffer dissent or anydiscordant element to get foothold among them. Sir ChristopherGardner's rank and title could not save him: he was not of the sortthey wanted, and they shipped him back. Roger Williams's virtues, learning, apostolic piety, could not save him; and they drove him intoa wintry wilderness, hunting him beyond their borders. It was not somuch a question whether Baptists, Antinomians, or Quakers were rightor wrong, as a preformed determination not to have any dissentients ofany description among them. They had sacrificed all to find and tomake a country for themselves, and they meant to keep it tothemselves. They had gone out of everybody else's way, and they didnot mean to let anybody else come into their way. They did notunderstand the great truth which Hugh Peters preached to Parliament, "Why, " said he, "cannot Christians differ, and yet be friends? Allchildren should be fed, though they have different faces and shapes:unity, not uniformity, is the Christian word. " They admitted no suchnotion as this. They thought uniformity the only basis of unity. Theymeant to make and to keep this a country after their own pattern, aCongregational, Puritan, Cambridge-Platform-man's country. The timehas not yet come when we can lift up clean hands against them. Twosuccessive chief-magistrates of the United States have opened the doorand signified to one-eighth part of our whole people, that it will bebest for them to walk out. So long as the doctrine is maintained thatthis is the white man's country, or any man's, or any class or kind ofmen's country, it becomes us to close our lips against denunciation ofthe Fathers of New England because they tried to keep the country tothemselves. The sentiment or notion on which they acted, in whateverform it appears, however high the station from which it emanates, orhowever long it lasts in the world, is equally false and detestable inall its shapes. It is a defiant rebellion against that law whichdeclares that "all nature's difference is all nature's peace;" thatthere can be no harmony without variety of sound, no social unitywithout unlimited freedom, and no true liberty where any are deprivedof equal rights; that differences ought to bring men together, ratherthan keep them apart; and that the only government that can standagainst the shocks of time, and grow stronger and dearer to all itspeople, is one that recognizes no differences of whatever kind amongthem. The only consistent or solid foundation on which a republic or achurch can be built, is an absolute level, with no enclosures and noexclusion. 

Townsend Bishop's grant of three hundred acres was made on the 16th ofJanuary, 1636. When he sold it, Oct. 18, 1641, it appears by the deed, that there were on it edifices, gardens, yards, enclosures, andmeadows. A large force must have been put and kept upon it, from thefirst, to have produced such results in so short a time. Orchards hadbeen planted. The manner in which the grounds were laid out is stillindicated by embankments, with artificial slopes and roadways, whichexhibit the fine taste of the proprietor, and must have required alarge expenditure of money and labor. Although the estate has alwaysbeen in the hands of owners competent to take care of it and keep itin good preservation, none but the original proprietor would have beenlikely to have made the outlay apparent on its face, on the planadopted. The mansion in which he resided stands to-day. Its front, facing the south, has apparently been widened, at some remoteintermediate date since its original erection, by a slight extensionon the western end, beyond the porch. It has been otherwise, perhaps, somewhat altered in the course of time by repairs; but its generalaspect, as exhibited in the frontispiece of this volume, and itsoriginal strongly compacted and imperishable frame, remain. No saw wasused in shaping its timbers; they were all hewn, by the broad-axe, ofthe most durable oak: they are massive, and rendered by time as hardto penetrate almost as iron. The walls and stairway of the cellar, theentrance to which is seen by the side of the porch, constructed ofsuch stones as could be gathered on the surface of a new country, bearthe marks of great antiquity. A long, low kitchen, with a stud ofscarcely six feet, extended originally the whole length of thelean-to, on the north side of the house. The rooms of the main housewere of considerably higher stud. The old roadway, the outlines ofwhich still remain, approached the house from the east, came up to itsnorth-east corner, wound round its front, and continued from itsnorth-west corner, on a track still visible, over a brook and throughthe apple-orchard planted by Bishop, to the point where theburial-ground of the village now is; and so on towards the lands thenoccupied by Richard Hutchinson, also to the lands afterwards owned byNathaniel Ingersol, towards Beaver Dam, and the first settlements inthat direction and to the westward. In general it may be said, thatthe structural proportions and internal arrangements of the house, taken in its relations to the vestiges and indications on the face ofthe grounds, show that it is coeval with the first occupancy of thefarm. But we do not depend, in this case, upon conjecturalconsiderations, or on mere tradition, which, on such a point, is notalways reliable. It happens to be demonstrated, that this is theveritable house built and occupied by Townsend Bishop, in 1636, by asingular and irrefragable chain of specific proof. A protracted landsuit, hereafter to be described, gave rise to a great mass of papers, which are preserved in the files of the county courts and the StateDepartment; among them are several plots made by surveyors, andadduced in evidence by the parties. Not only the locality but adiagram of the house, as then standing, are given. The spot on whichit stood is shown. Further, it appears, that in the deeds oftransference of the estate, the homestead is specially described asthe house in which Townsend Bishop lived, called "Bishop's Mansion. "This continues to a period subsequent to the style of itsarchitecture, and within recent tradition and the memory of theliving. In the old Salem Commoner's records, it is called "Bishop'sCottage, " which was the name generally given to dwelling-houses inthose early times. Having, as occasion required, been seasonablyrepaired, it is as strong and good a house to-day as can be found. Itsoriginal timbers, if kept dry and well aired, are beyond decay; and itmay stand, a useful, eligible, and comely residence, through a futureas long as the past. It may be doubted whether any dwelling-house nowin use in this country can be carried back, by any thing like asimilar strength of evidence, to an equal antiquity. Its site, inreference to the surrounding landscape, was well chosen. Here itshospitable and distinguished first proprietor lived, in the interimsof his public and official service, in peace and tranquillity, untilferreted out by the intrusive spirit of an intolerant age. Here hewelcomed his neighbors, --Endicott, Downing, Peters, John Winthrop, Jr. , Read, and other kindred spirits. [A]

[Footnote A: Not only the storms of two hundred and thirty years, butthe bolts of heaven, have beat in vain upon this mansion. The viewgiven of it in the frontispiece is from a sketch taken in winter. Theleafless branches of a tall elm at its western end are represented. Atnoon on Saturday, July 28, 1866, during a violent thunder-storm, theelectric fluid seems to have passed down the tree, rending and tearingsome of its branches, and leaving its traces on the trunk. It flashedinto the house. It tore the roof, knocking away one corner, displacingin patches the mortar that coated the old chimney top and sides, hacking the edges of the brick-work, splitting off the side of anextension to the building at the western end, entering a chamber atthat point, where two children were sitting at a window, and throwingupon the floor, within two or three feet of them, a considerableportion of the plastered ceiling. It then scattered all through theapartments. What looked like perforations, as if made by shot orpistol-balls, were found in many places; but there were nocorresponding marks on the opposite sides of the walls or partitions. Portions of the paper-hangings were stripped off, and small sliversripped up from the floors. It struck the frames of looking-glasses, cracking off small pieces of the wood, but only in one instancebreaking the mirror. It cut a velvet band by which one was hung; andit was found on the floor, the mirror downward and unbroken, as if ithad been carefully laid there. In the attic, fragments of the oldgnarled and knotted rafters, of different lengths, --from four or fivefeet to mere chips, --were scattered in quantities upon the floor, andgrooves made lengthwise along posts and implements of household use. Large cracks were left in the wooden casings of some of the doors andwindows. A family of eight persons were seated around thedinner-table. All were more or less affected. They were deprived forthe time of the use of their feet and ancles; were stunned, paralyzed, and rendered insensible for a few moments by the shock; and felt theeffects, some of them, for a day or two in their lower limbs. In frontof each person at the table was a tall goblet, which had just beenfilled with water. As soon as they were able to notice, they found thewater dripping on all sides to the floor, the whole table-cloth wet, seven of the goblets entirely empty, the eighth half emptied, and notone of them thrown over, or in the slightest manner displaced. Thewhole house was filled with what seemed, to the sight and smell, to besmoke; but no combustion, scorch, discoloration, or the leastindication of heat, could be found on any of the objects struck. Thebuilding, in its thirteen rooms, from the garret to the ground-floor, had been flooded with lightning; but, with all its inmates, escapedwithout considerable or permanent injury. ]

In the course of a mysterious providence, this venerable mansion wasdestined to be rendered memorable by its connection with the darkestscene in our annals. As that scene cannot otherwise be comprehended inall the elements that led to it, it is necessary to give theintermediate history of the Townsend Bishop farm and mansion. In 1641, Bishop sold it to Henry Chickering, who seems to have been residingfor some time in Salem, and to whom, in January, 1640, a grant of landhad been made by the town. He continued to own it until the 4th ofOctober, 1648; although he does not appear to have resided on the farmlong, as he soon removed to Dedham, from which place he was deputy tothe General Court in 1642, and several years afterwards. He sold thefarm at the above-mentioned date to Governor Endicott for one hundredand sixty pounds. In 1653, John Endicott, Jr. , the eldest son of theGovernor, married Elizabeth, daughter of Jeremiah Houchins, an eminentcitizen of Boston, who had before resided in Hingham, which place herepresented as deputy for six years. The name was pronounced"Houkins, " and so perhaps was finally spelled "Hawkins. " By agreement, or "articles of marriage contract, " Endicott bestowed the farm uponhis son. "Present possession" was given. How long, or how much of thetime, the young couple lived on the estate, is not known. Theirprincipal residence was in Boston. The General Court, in 1660, grantedJohn Endicott, Jr. , four hundred acres of land on the eastern side ofthe upper part of Merrimac River. After the purchase of the farm fromChickering, the Endicott property covered nearly a thousand acres inone tract, extending from the arms of the sea to the centre of thepresent village of Tapleyville. On the 10th of May, 1662, the Governorexecuted a deed, carrying out the engagements of the marriagecontract, giving to his son John, his heirs, and assigns for ever, theBishop farm. Governor Endicott died in 1665. A will was found signedand sealed by him, dated May 2, 1659, in which, referring to themarriage gift to John, he bequeathes the aforesaid farm to "him andhis heirs, " but does not add, "and assigns. " Another item of the willis, "The land I have bequeathed to my two sons, in one place oranother, my will is that the longest liver of them shall enjoy thewhole, except the Lord send them children to inherit it after them. "Unfortunately, there were no witnesses to the will. It was not allowedin Probate. The matter was carried up to the General Court; and it wasdecided Aug. 1, 1665, that the court "do not approve of the instrumentproduced in court to be the last will and testament of the late JohnEndicott, Esq. , governor. " In October of the same year, John Endicott, Jr. , petitioned the General Court to act on the settlement of hisfather's estate; and the court directs administration to be granted to"Mrs. Elizabeth Endicott and her two sons, John and Zerubabel, " andthat they bring in an inventory to the next county court at Boston, and to dispose of the same as the law directs. Upon this, the widowof the Governor, and his son Zerubabel, again appeal to the GeneralCourt; and on the 23d of May, 1666, "after a full hearing of allparties concerned in the said estate, i. E. , the said Mrs. ElizabethEndicott and her two sons, Mr. John and Mr. Zerubabel Endicott, Mr. Jeremiah Houchin being also present in court, and respectivelypresenting their pleas and evidences in the case, " it was finallydecided and ordered by the court, that the provisions of the documentpurporting to be the will of Governor Endicott should be carried intoeffect, with these exceptions: that the Bishop or Chickering farmshall go to his son John "to him, his heirs and assigns for ever;" andthat Elizabeth, the wife of said son John, if she should survive herhusband, shall enjoy during her life all the estate of her husband inall the other houses and lands mentioned in the instrument purportingto be his father's will. The court adjudge that this must have been"the real intent of the aforesaid John Endicott, Esq. , deceased, whohad during his life special favor and respect for her. " They give thewidow of the Governor "the goods and chattels" of the said JohnEndicott, Esq. , her late husband, provided that, if "she shall dieseized to the value of more than eighty pounds sterling" thereof, thesurplus shall be divided between her two sons: John to have a doubleportion thereof. Finally, they appoint the widow sole administratrix, and require her to bring in a true inventory to the next court for thecounty of Suffolk, and to pay all debts. 

John and his father-in-law had it all their own way. The decision ofthe court was perhaps correct, according to legal principles; althoughit is not so certain that it was, in all respects, in conformity withthe intent of Governor Endicott. Undoubtedly, as the language of thedeed shows, he had made up his mind to give to his son John and "hisassigns" absolute, full, and final possession of the Bishop farm. Butit seems equally certain, that he meant to have the rest of his landedestate, including the Orchard Farm and the Ipswich-river farm, godirectly and wholly to the survivor, if either of his sons diedwithout issue. The facts and dates are as follows: His son John wasmarried in 1653. The Governor's will was made in 1659. It had thenbecome quite probable that John might not have issue. The will giveshim and his heirs, but not his assigns, the Bishop farm. In the eventof his death without issue, his widow would have her dower and legallife right in it, but the final heir would be Zerubabel. In 1662, theGovernor, who had, some years before, removed to Boston, where heresided the remainder of his life, executed a deed, giving to his sonJohn, "his heirs and assigns, " a full and permanent title to theBishop farm. This was a variation of the plan for the disposition ofhis estate as shown in his will. He probably designed to make a newwill, securing to his natural heirs, so far as his other landedproperty was concerned, what he had thus permitted to pass away fromthem in the Bishop farm; that is, the full and immediate possessionby the survivor, if either of the sons died without issue. It was afavorite idea, almost a sacred principle, in those days, to have landsgo in the natural descent. The sentiment is quite apparent in thetenor of the Governor's will. When he deprived, by his deed to John in1662, Zerubabel's family of the right to the final possession of theBishop farm, it can hardly be doubted that he relied upon theprovisions of his will to secure to them the immediate, completepossession of all his other lands, without the incumbrance of anyclaim of dower or otherwise of John's widow. But the pressure ofpublic duties prevented his duly executing his will, and putting itinto a new shape, in conformity with the circumstances of the case. The troubles that followed teach the necessity of the utmost cautionand carefulness in that most difficult and most irremediable of allbusiness transactions, --the attempt to continue the control ofproperty, after death, by written instruments. 

John Endicott, Jr. , died in February, 1668, without issue; leaving hiswhole estate to his widow, "her heirs and assigns for ever. " His willis dated Jan. 27, 1668, and was offered to Probate on the 29th ofFebruary, 1668. His widow married, Aug. 31, 1668, the Rev. JamesAllen, one of the ministers of the First Church in Boston, whoseprevious wife, Hannah Dummer, by whom he received five hundred acresof land, had died in March, 1668. His Endicott wife died April 5, 1673, leaving the Townsend-Bishop farm and all her other property tohim; and on the 11th of September, of the same year, he married SarahHawlins. By his two preceding wives he received twelve hundred acresof land. How much he got by the last-mentioned, we have noinformation. Besides these matrimonial accumulations, the accountsseem to indicate that he was rich before. 

It may well be imagined, that it could not have been very agreeable tothe family at the Orchard Farm to see this choice and extensiveportion of their estate, which was within full view from theirwindows, swept into the hands of utter strangers in so rapid andextraordinary a manner, by a series of circumstances most distastefuland provoking. But this was but the beginning of their trouble. 

On the 29th of April, 1678, Allen sold the Bishop farm to FrancisNurse, of the town of Salem, for four hundred pounds. Nurse was anearly settler, and, before this purchase, had lived, for some fortyyears, "near Skerry's, " on the North River, between the main part ofthe settlement in the town of Salem and the ferry to Beverly. He isdescribed as a "tray-maker. " The making of these articles, and similarobjects of domestic use, was an important employment in a new countryremote from foreign supply. He appears to have been a very respectableperson, of great stability and energy of character, whose judgment wasmuch relied on by his neighbors. No one is mentioned more frequentlyas umpire to settle disputes, or arbitrator to adjust conflictingclaims. He was often on committees to determine boundaries orestimate valuations, or on local juries to lay out highways andassess damages. The fact that he was willing to encounter thedifficulties connected with such a heavy transaction as the purchaseof the Bishop farm at such a price at his time of life proves that hehad a spirit equal to a bold undertaking. He was then fifty-eightyears of age. His wife Rebecca was fifty-seven years of age. We shallmeet her again. 

They had four sons, --Samuel, John, Francis, and Benjamin; and fourdaughters, --Rebecca, married to Thomas Preston, Mary to John Tarbell, Elizabeth to William Russell, and Sarah, who remained unmarried untilafter the death of her mother. With this strong force of stalwart sonsand sons-in-law, and their industrious wives, Francis Nurse took holdof the farm. The terms of the purchase were so judicious andingenious, that they are worthy of being related, and show in whatmanner energetic and able-bodied men, even if not possessed ofcapital, particularly if they could command an effective co-operationin the labor of their families, obtained possession of valuable landedestates. The purchase-money was not required to be paid until theexpiration of twenty-one years. In the mean time, a moderate annualrent was fixed upon; seven pounds for each of the first twelve years, and ten pounds for each of the remaining nine years. If, at the end ofthe time, the amount stipulated had not been paid, or Nurse shouldabandon the undertaking, the property was to relapse to Allen. Disinterested and suitable men, whose appointment was provided for, were then to estimate the value added to the estate by Nurse duringhis occupancy, by the clearing of meadows or erection of buildings orother permanent improvements, and all of that value over and above onehundred and fifty pounds was to be paid to him. If any part of theprincipal sum should be paid prior to the expiration of twenty-oneyears, a proportionate part of the farm was to be relieved of allobligation to Allen, vest absolutely in Nurse, and be disposable byhim. By these terms, Allen felt authorized to fix a very high pricefor the farm, it not being payable until the lapse of a long period oftime. If not paid at all, the property would come back to him, withone hundred and fifty pounds of value added to it. It was not a badbargain for him, --a man of independent means derived from othersources, and so situated as not to be able to carry on the farmhimself. It was a good investment ahead. To Nurse the terms were mostfavorable. He did not have to pay down a dollar at the start. The lowrent required enabled him to apply almost the entire income from thefarm to improvements that would make it more and more productive. Before half the time had elapsed, a value was created competent todischarge the whole sum due to Allen. His children severally had goodfarms within the bounds of the estate, were able to assume with easetheir respective shares of the obligations of the purchase; and theproperty was thus fully secured within the allotted time. Allen gave, at the beginning, a full deed, in the ordinary form, which wasrecorded in this county. Nurse gave a duly executed bond, in which theforegoing conditions are carefully and clearly defined. That wasrecorded in Suffolk County; and nothing, perhaps, was known in theneighborhood, at the time or ever after, of the terms of thetransaction. When the success of the enterprise was fully secured, Nurse conveyed to his children the larger half of the farm, reservingthe homestead and a convenient amount of land in his own possession. The plan of this division shows great fairness and judgment, and wasentirely satisfactory to them all. They were required, by the deeds hegave them, to maintain a roadway by which they could communicate witheach other and with the old parental home. 

Here the venerable couple were living in truly patriarchal style, occupying the "mansion" of Townsend Bishop, when the witchcraftdelusion occurred. They and their children were all clustered withinthe limits of the three-hundred-acre farm. They were one family. Theterritory was their own, secured by their united action, and madecommodious, productive, valuable, and beautiful to behold, by theirharmonious, patient, and persevering labor. Each family had ahomestead, and fields and gardens; and children were growing up inevery household. The elder sons and sons-in-law had become men ofinfluence in the affairs of the church and village. It was a scene ofdomestic happiness and prosperity rarely surpassed. The work of lifehaving been successfully done, it seemed that a peaceful and serenedescent into the vale of years was secured to Francis and RebeccaNurse. But far otherwise was the allotment of a dark and inscrutableprovidence. 

There is some reason to suspect that the prosperity of the Nurses hadawakened envy and jealousy among the neighbors. The very fact thatthey were a community of themselves and by themselves, may haveoperated prejudicially. To have a man, who, for forty years, had beenknown, in the immediate vicinity, as a farmer and mechanic on a smallscale, without any pecuniary means, get possession of such a property, and spread out his family to such an extent, was inexplicable to all, and not relished perhaps by some. There seems to have been adisposition to persist in withholding from him the dignity of alandholder; and, long after he had distributed his estate among hisdescendants, it is mentioned in deeds made by parties that boundedupon it, as "the farm which Mr. Allen, of Boston, lets to the Nurses. "Not knowing probably any thing about it, they call it, even afterNurse's death, "Mr. Allen's farm. " This, however, was a slight matter. When Allen sold the farm to Nurse, he bound himself to defend thetitle; and he was true to his bond. What was required to be done inthis direction may, perhaps, have exposed the Nurses to animositieswhich afterwards took terrible effect against them. 

In granting lands originally, neither the General Court nor the townexercised sufficient care to define boundaries. There does not appearto have been any well-arranged system, based upon elaborate, accurate, scientific surveys. Of the dimensions of the area of arough, thickly wooded, unfrequented country, the best estimates of themost practised eyes, and measurements resting on mere exploration orperambulation, are very unreliable. The consequence was, that, in manycases, grants were found to overlap each other. This was the case withthe Bishop farm; and soon after Nurse came into possession, and hadbegun to operate upon it, a conflict commenced; trespasses werecomplained of; suits were instituted; and one of the most memorableand obstinately contested land-controversies known to our courts tookplace. In that controversy Nurse was not formally a principal. Thecase was between James Allen and Zerubabel Endicott, or between Allenand Nathaniel Putnam. 

An inspection of the map, at this point, will enable us to understandthe grounds on which the suit was contested. The Orchard Farm wasgranted to Endicott, as has been stated, July 3, 1632, by the GeneralCourt. The grant states the bounds on the south and on the north to betwo rivers; on the east, another river, into which they both flow;and, on the west, the mainland. Where this western line was to strikethe rivers on the north and south is not specified; but the naturalinterpretation would seem to be, in the absence of any thing to thecontrary, that it was to strike them at their respective heads. Theevidence of all persons who were conversant with the premises duringthe life of the Governor as connected with the farm was unanimous andconclusive to this point; that is, that he and they always supposedthat the west line was, as drawn on the map, from the head of oneriver to the head of the other; that the farm embraced all betweenthem as far up as the tide set. It was objected, on the other side, that this made the farm much more than three hundred acres; but as anoffset to that was the fact, that a considerable part of the area wasswamp or marsh, not usually taken into the account in reckoning theextent of a grant, and the additional fact, that the language of theGeneral Court in reference to quantity was not precise, --"about" threehundred acres. At the same date with the grant to Endicott, theGeneral Court granted two hundred acres to Mr. Skelton, which tract isgiven on the map. 

As has been stated, the General Court conferred upon the towns theexclusive right to dispose of the lands within their limits, March 3, 1635. On the 10th of December of that year, the town of Salem grantedto Robert Cole the tract of three hundred acres subsequently purchasedby Emanuel Downing, which is indicated on the map. On the 11th ofJanuary, 1636, the grant of three hundred acres was made to TownsendBishop. Its language is unfortunately obscure in some expressions; butit is clear, that the tract was to be four hundred rods in length, onehundred and twenty-four rods in width at the western end, and onehundred and sixteen rods at the eastern. At the north-east corner itwas to meet the water or brook that separated it from the grant toSkelton; and it was also to "but" upon, or touch, at the eastern end, the land granted to Endicott by the General Court. After the grant toBishop, the town, from time to time, made grants to Stileman of landnorth of the Bishop grant. Stileman's grants adjoined Skelton's at thenorth-eastern corner of the Bishop farm. That part of Stileman's landhad come into possession of Nathaniel Putnam, and the residuewestwardly, together with the grant to Weston, into the possession ofHutchinson, Houlton, and Ingersol. Still further west, the town hadmade grants to Swinnerton. Their respective locations are given in themap. The point of difficulty which gave rise to litigation was this:The Bishop farm was required, by the terms of the grant, to be onehundred and sixteen rods wide at its eastern end. But there was noroom for it. The requisite width could not be got without encroachingupon either Putnam or Endicott, or both. As Endicott stood upon anearlier title than that of Bishop, and from a higher authority, andPutnam upon a later title from an inferior authority, the court oftrials might have disposed of the matter, at the opening, on thatground, and Putnam been left to suffer the encroachment. But it didnot so decide; and the case went on. The struggle was between Endicottto push it north, and thereby save his Orchard Farm, and the landbetween it and the Bishop grant, given by the town to his father, called the Governor's Plain, and Nathaniel Putnam to push it south, and thereby save the land he had received from his wife's father, Richard Hutchinson, who had purchased from Stileman. Allen stood onthe defensive against both of them. The Nurses had nothing to do butto attend to their own business, carrying on their farming operationsup to the limits of their deed, looking to Allen for redress, if, inthe end, the dimensions of their estate should be curtailed. But, being the occupants, and, until finally ousted, the owners of theland, if there was any intrusion to be repelled, or violence to bemet, or fighting to be done, they were the ones to do it. They wereequal to the situation. 

After various trials in the courts of law in all possible shapes, thewhole subject was carried up to the General Court, where it wasdecided, in conformity with the report of a special commission in May, 1679, substantially in favor of Putnam and Allen. Endicott petitionedfor a new hearing. Another commission was appointed; and their reportwas accepted in May, 1682. It was more unfavorable to Endicott thanthe previous one. He protested against the judgment of the court inearnest but respectful language, and petitioned for still anotherhearing. They again complied with his request, and appointed a day foronce more examining the case; but, when the day came, Nov. 24, 1683, he was sick in bed, and the case was settled irrevocably against him. 

The map gives the lines of the Bishop farm as finally settled by theGeneral Court. It will be noticed, that it is laid directly across theGovernor's Plain, and runs far into the Orchard Farm "up to the rocksnear Endicott's dwelling-house, " or, as it is otherwise stated, "within a few rods of Guppy's ditch, near to" the said house. It maybe said to have been a necessity, as the original three hundred acresof the grant to Townsend Bishop had to be made up. It could not gonorth; for Houlton and Ingersol stood upon the Weston grant, andHutchinson and Nathaniel Putnam stood upon Stileman's grants, to pushit back. It could not go west or south-west, for there Swinnertonstood to fend off upon his grants; and there, too, was NathanielPutnam, upon his own grant, and lands he had purchased of anotheroriginal grantee. It could not be swung round to the south withoutjamming up the lands of Felton and others, or pushing them over thegrants, made to Robert Cole--under which Downing had purchased--and toThomas Read. All these parties were combined to force itsouth-eastwardly over the grounds of Endicott. Nathaniel Putnam washis most fatal antagonist. He was a man of remarkable energy, ofconsummate adroitness, and untiring resources in such a transaction;and he so managed to press in the bounds of the Bishop farm, at thenorth-east, as to gain a valuable strip for himself. With this strongman against him, acting in combination with the rich and influentialJames Allen, minister of the great metropolitan First Church, andlicenser of the press, who brought the whole power of his clerical andsocial connections in Boston and throughout the colony to bear uponthe General Court, Zerubabel Endicott had no chance for justice, andno redress for wrong. In vain he invoked the memory of his father, orof Winthrop, the grandfather of his wife. His father and both theWinthrops had long before left the scene: a new generation had risen, and there was none to help him. 

One would have supposed, that the General Court, which had granted theOrchard Farm to Governor Endicott, would have felt bound, inself-respect and in honor, to have protected it against anyoverlapping grants subsequently made by an inferior authority. Underthe circumstances of the case, it was its duty to have held theOrchard Farm intact, and made it up to the satisfaction of Allen andNurse by a grant elsewhere, or an equitable compensation in money. Itowed so much to the son of Endicott and the grand-daughter ofWinthrop, the first noble Fathers of the colony. Perhaps the courtfound its justification in the phraseology of the deed of conveyanceof the Bishop farm from Governor Endicott to his son John. Afterreciting or referring to the original town grant to Bishop, and thedeeds from Bishop to Chickering, and from Chickering to himself, theGovernor conveys to his son John all the houses, &c. , and every partand parcel of the land "to the utmost extent thereof, according as isexpressed or included in either of the forecited deeds, or towngrant. " It was maintained, and justly, by Allen, that he held all thatwas conveyed to John Endicott, Jr. But the Court had no right toencroach upon the Orchard Farm, which had been granted to theGovernor by them prior to all deeds and to the town grant to Bishop. 

Never did that deep and sagacious observation on the mysteries ofhuman nature, "Men's judgments are a parcel of their fortunes, "receive a more striking or melancholy illustration than in the case ofZerubabel Endicott. With his falling fortunes, his judgment anddiscretion fell also; his mind, maddened by a sense of wrong, seemedbent upon exposing itself to new wrongs. Having been broken down bylawsuits, that had wasted his estate, he seemed to have acquired ablind passion for them. Having destroyed his peace and embarrassed hisaffairs in attempts to resist the adjudications of the Court, hepersisted in struggling against them. He had tried to push the Bishopgrant west, over the land of Nathaniel Putnam in that quarter. Thehighest tribunal had settled it against him. But he appeared to beincapable of realizing the fact. He sent his hired men to cut timberon that land. They worked there some days, felled a large number oftrees, and hewed them into beams and joists for the frame of a house. One morning, returning to their work, there was no timber to be found;logs, framework, and all, were gone. They were carefully piled up amile away, by the side of Putnam's dwelling-house, who had sent twoteams, one of four oxen, the other of two oxen and a horse, with anadequate force of men, and in two loadings had cleaned out the whole. Endicott of course sued him, and of course was cast. 

When the General Court had consented to give him a rehearing of thecase of the Bishop farm, they expressly forbade his making any "strip"of the land in the mean while. But with the infatuation which seemedto possess him, and not heeding how fatally it would prejudice hiscause at the impending hearing to violate the order of the Court, heagain sent a gang of men to cut wood on the land in controversy. Thefollowing shows the result:--

 "Hugh Jones, aged 46 years, and Alexius Reinolds, aged 25 years, testify and say, that we, these deponents, being desired by Mr. Zerubabel Endicott to cut up some wood, for his winter firewood, accordingly went with our teams, which had four oxen and a horse; and there we met with several other teams of our neighbors, which were upon the same account, that is to say, to help carry up Mr. Endicott some wood for his winter firewood, and when we had loaded our sleds, Thomas Preston and John Tarbell came in a violent manner, and hauled the wood out of our sleds; and Francis Nurse, being present, demanded whose men we were. Mr. Endicott, being present, answered, they were his men. "

These witnesses testify that this "battle of the wilderness" lastedtwo days, --Endicott's men cutting the wood and loading the teams, andNurse's men pitching it off. The altercations and conflicts that tookplace between the parties during those two days may easily beimagined. Whether there was a final, decisive pitched battle, we arenot informed. Perhaps there was. The woods rang with rough echoes, wemay be well assured. A lawsuit followed; the result could not be indoubt. Endicott had no right there; he was there in direct violationof the order of Court. Nurse was in possession, had a right, and wasbound, to keep the land from being stripped. 

Shortly after this, Endicott broke down, under the difficulties thathad accumulated around him. On the 24th of November, 1683, as we haveseen, he was "sick in bed. " Two days before, --that is, on the 22d ofNovember, --he had made his will, which was presented in court on the27th of March, 1684. He was game to the last; for this is an item ofthe will:--

 "Whereas my late father, by his last will, bequeathed to me his farm called Bishop's or Chickering's farm, I do give the said farm to my five sons, to be equally divided among them. "

The will of his father had been declared invalid on that point, andothers. The whole thing had been conclusively settled for years; buthe never would recognize the fact. It is a singular instance of anobstinacy of will completely superseding and suppressing the reasonand the judgment. He lost the perception of the actual and real, inclinging to what he felt to be the right. 

Every association and sentiment of his soul had been shocked by thewrongs he had suffered. He could not walk over his fields, or lookfrom his windows, without feeling that a property which his father hadgiven to his brother had, in a manner that he knew would have been asodious to that father as it was to him, passed into the hands ofstrangers, and been used as a wedge on which everybody had conspiredto deal blows, driving it into the centre of his patrimonial acres, splitting and rending them through and through. He brooded over thethought, until, whenever his mind was turned to it, his reason wasdethroned, his heart broken, and under its weight he fell into hisgrave. 

An argument addressed by him to the court and jury, in one of theinnumerable trials of the Bishop-farm case, is among the papers onfile. It appears to be a verbatim report of the speech as it wasdelivered at the time, and proves him to have been a man of talents. It is courteous, gentlemanly, and, I might say, scholarly in itsdiction and style, skilful in its statements, and forcible in itsarguments. 

In all the earlier trials, the juries uniformly gave verdicts in favorof Endicott; but Allen carried the cases up to the General Court, which exercised a final and unrestrained jurisdiction in all mattersreferred to it. It usually appointed committees or commissioners toexamine such questions, accepted their reports, and made them binding. Lands were thus disposed of without the agency, and against thedecisions, of juries. In his arguments addressed to the General Court, Zerubabel Endicott protested against this jurisdiction, by which hislands were taken from him "by a committee, in an arbitrary way, beingneither bound nor sworn by law or evidence. " He boldly denounced it. 

 "To be disseized of my inheritance; to be judged by three or four committee-men, who are neither bound to law nor evidence, --who are, or may be, mutable in their apprehensions, doing one thing to-day, and soon again undoing what they did, --I conceive, to be judged in such an arbitrary way is repugnant to the fundamental law of England contained in Magna Charta, chap. 29, which says no freeman shall be disseized of his freehold but by the lawful judgment of his peers, --that is to say, by due process of law; which was also confirmed by the Petition of Right, by Act of Parliament, _tertio Caroli I_. And also such arbitrary jurisdiction was exploded in putting down the Star-Chamber Court; and the excessive fines imposed upon all such actings. See 'English Liberties, ' as also the fourth and sixth articles against the Earl of Strafford in Baker's 'Chronicle, ' folio 518. "

He closes one of his remonstrances thus:--

 "The humble request of your petitioner to the Hon. Gen. Court, that, as an Englishman, --as a freeman of this jurisdiction; as descended from him who, in his time, sought the welfare of this commonwealth, --I may have the benefit and protection of the wholesome laws established in this jurisdiction: that, in my extreme wrong, I may have liberty to seek relief in a way of law, and may not, contrary to Magna Charta, be disseized of my freehold by the arbitrary act of two or three committee-men; the fundamental law of England knowing no such constitution, abhorring such administrations: and that the Hon. Court would release your petitioner from the injurious effects of the said committee's act, and explode so pernicious a precedent. "

Zerubabel Endicott was an imprudent and obstinate man, but had thetraits of a generous, ardent, and noble character. He was a physicianby profession. His second wife--the widow, as has been stated, of Rev. Antipas Newman, of Wenham, and daughter of John Winthrop, Jr. , governor of Connecticut--survived him. Although he left five sons, thename, at one time, was borne by a single descendant only, a lad ofseven years of age, --Samuel, a grandson of Zerubabel. On him it hungsuspended, but he saved it. From that boy, those who bear the name inNew England have been derived. We rejoice to believe that they willpreserve it, and keep its honor bright. 

Winthrop was recognized as the great leader in the early history ofthe Colony. He had a combination of qualities that marked him as awise and good man, and gave him precedence. The eminent dignity of hischaracter was admired and revered by all. No one was more ready toadmit this than Endicott. Never were men placed towards each other inrelations more severely testing their magnanimity, and none ever borethe test more perfectly. But Endicott was, after all, the mostcomplete representative man of that generation. He was thoroughlyidentified with the people, participating in their virtues and intheir defects. He was a strict religionist, a sturdy Puritan, a firmadministrator of the law; at the same time, there are indications thathe was of a genial spirit. He was personally brave, and officiallyintrepid. His administration of the government required nerve, and hehad it. Sometimes the ardor of his temperament put him for a momentoff his guard; but he was quick to acknowledge his error. He was trueto the people, who never faltered in their fidelity to him. The authorof "Wonder-working Providence" described him as "a fit instrument tobegin the wilderness worke, of courage bold undaunted, yet sociableand of a cheerful spirit. " I have presented some instances of his kindand pleasant relations with his workmen and neighbors. His name willever be held in honored remembrance in this vicinity, where his usefulenterprise was appreciated; and his descendants in our day, and to thepresent time, have contributed to the prosperity and the adornment ofthe community. 

It is not unlikely, that hostile feelings towards the Nurses, whichcontributed afterwards to serious results, may have been engendered inthis long-continued land quarrel. There is evidence that no suchfeeling existed on the part of the Endicotts: but there were manyothers interested; for, by testimony at the trials and in outsidediscussions, the whole community had become more or less implicated inthe strife. The Nurses, as holding the ground and having to bear thebrunt of defending it in all cases of intrusion, had a difficultposition, and may have made some enemies. At any rate, thiscontroversy was one of the means of stirring up animosities in theneighborhood; and an account of it has been deemed necessary, ascontributing to indicate the elements of the awful convulsions whichsoon afterwards desolated Salem Village. 

When we reach the story, for which this account of the farms of thevillage and the population that grew up on them is a preparative, weshall come back to the Townsend-Bishop grant, and to the house, stillstanding, that he built and dwelt in, upon it. It may be well topause, and view its interesting history prior to 1692. While occupiedby its original owner, the "mansion, " or "cottage, " was the scene ofsocial intercourse among the choicest spirits of the earliest age ofNew England. Here Bishop, and, after him, Chickering, entertainedtheir friends. Here the fine family of Richard Ingersoll was broughtup. Here Governor Endicott projected plans for opening the country;and the road that passes its entrance-gate was laid out by him. Tothis same house, young John Endicott brought his youthful Bostonbride. Here she came again, fifteen years afterwards, as the bride ofthe learned and distinguished James Allen, to show him the farm which, received as a "marriage gift" from her former husband, she had broughtas a "marriage gift" to him. Here the same Allen, in less than sixyears afterwards, brought still another bride. In all these various, and some of them rather rapid, changes, it was, no doubt, often theresort of distinguished guests, and the place of meeting of manypleasant companies. During the protracted years of litigation for itspossession, frequent consultations were held within it; and now, fortwelve years, it had been the home of a happy, harmonious, andprosperous family, exemplifying the industry, energy, and enterpriseof a New England household. A new chapter was destined, as we shallsee, to be opened in its singular and diversified history. But we mustreturn to the enumeration of the original landholders of the village. 

George Corwin came to Salem in 1638. He had large tracts of land invarious places. He lived, a part of his time, on his farm in thevillage; is found to have taken an active part in the proceedings ofthe people, particularly in military affairs; and was captain of acompany of cavalry. His great mercantile transactions probably led himto have his residence mostly in the town, first on a lot on WashingtonStreet, near the corner of Norman Street, where his grandson thesheriff lived in 1692. In 1660, he bought of Ann, the relict ofNicholas Woodbury, a lot on Essex Street, next east of the BrowneBlock, with a front of about one hundred and fifty feet. Here he builta fine mansion, in which he lived the remainder of his days. He diedJan. 6, 1685, leaving an estate inventoried at £5, 964. 10_s. _7_d. _, --a large fortune for those times. His portrait is preserved byhis descendants, one of whom, the late George A. Ward, describes hisdress as represented in the picture: "A wrought flowing neckcloth, asash covered with lace, a coat with short cuffs and reaching half-waybetween the wrist and elbow; the skirts in plaits below; an octagonring and cane. " The last two articles are still preserved. Hisinventory mentions "a silver-laced cloth coat, a velvet ditto, a satinwaistcoat embroidered with gold, a trooping scarf and silver hat-band, golden-topped and embroidered, and a silver-headed cane. " His farms inthe vicinity contained fifteen hundred acres. His connections weredistinguished, and his descendants have included many eminent persons. The name, by male descent, disappeared for a time in this part of thecountry; but in the last generation it was restored in the femaledescent by an act of the Legislature, and is honorably borne by one ofour most respectable families, who inherit his blood, and cherish thememorials which time has spared of their first American ancestor. 

William Hathorne appears on the church records as early as 1636. Hedied in June, 1681, seventy-four years of age. No one in our annalsfills a larger space. As soldier commanding important and difficultexpeditions, as counsel in cases before the courts, as judge on thebench, and in innumerable other positions requiring talent andintelligence, he was constantly called to serve the public. He wasdistinguished as a public speaker, and is the only person, I believe, of that period, whose reputation as an orator has come down to us. Hewas an Assistant, that is, in the upper branch of the Legislature, seventeen years. He was a deputy twenty years. When the deputies, whobefore sat with the assistants, were separated into a distinct body, and the House of Representatives thus came into existence, in 1644, Hathorne was their first Speaker. He occupied the chair, withintermediate services on the floor from time to time, until raised tothe other House. He was an inhabitant of Salem Village, having hisfarm there, and a dwelling-house, in which he resided when hislegislative, military, and other official duties permitted. His sonJohn, who succeeded him in all his public honors, also lived on hisown farm in the village a great part of the time. The name isindelibly stamped on the hills and meadows of the region, as it was inthe civil history of that age, and has been in the elegant literatureof the present. 

William Trask was one of what are called the "First Planters. " He cameover before Endicott, had his residence on Salem Farms, was a mostenergetic, enterprising, and useful citizen, and filled a greatvariety of public stations. He brought large tracts of land underculture, planted orchards, and established mills at the head oftide-water on the North River. He was the military leader of the firstage of the plantations in this neighborhood, was captain of thetrain-band from the beginning, and, by his gallantry and energy inaction, commanded the applause of his contemporaries. For his servicesin the Pequot Expedition, the General Court gave him and hisassociates large grants of land. His obsequies were celebrated, on the16th of May, 1666, with great military parade; and the people of thetown and the whole surrounding country followed his honored remains tothe grave. 

Richard Davenport came to Salem in 1631. His first residence was inthe town; but soon he was led to the Farms. In 1636, he received agrant of eighty acres; in 1638, of two hundred and twenty acres; and, in 1642, eighty acres more, to be divided between him and CaptainLothrop. Besides these, he received several smaller grants of meadowand salt marsh. Such grants were made only with the view of havingthem duly improved; and it cannot be doubted that he was zealouslyengaged in agricultural operations. His town residence was on a lotreaching from Essex Street to the North River. Its front extended fromthe grounds now the site of the North Church to North Street. Hishouse stood at some distance back from Essex Street. This estate wassold by his administrators, in 1674, to Jonathan Corwin, whose familyoccupied it until a very recent period. He left the town in 1643, andsubsequently lived in what was afterwards Salem Village, until thepublic service called him away. He sold some of his estates, butretained others, on the Farms and in the town, to the time of hisdeath. He continued the superintendence of his country estate, whichseems to have been his family home, to the last. His military careergave him early distinction, and closed only with his life. In 1634, the General Court chose him "Ensign to Capt. Trask. " He was concernedwith Endicott in cutting out the cross from the king's colors. Thefollowing is from the record of a meeting of the court, Nov. 7, 1634:"It is ordered that Ensign Davenport shall be sent for by warrant, with command to bring his colors with him to the next court, as alsoany other that hath defaced the said colors. " Davenport did not seemanxious to cover up his agency in this matter; for, when he offeredhis next child to baptism, he signified to the assembly that he wasdetermined to commemorate and perpetuate the memory of thetransaction, by having her christened "True Cross. " It was necessaryto make a show of punishing Endicott and Davenport on this occasion, to prevent trouble from the home government. Soon after, we find theGeneral Court heaping honors upon Davenport, and finally, in 1639, making him a grant of one hundred and fifty acres of land, speciallynoticing his services in the Pequot War, which appear to have elicitedgeneral applause. In some desperate encounters with the savages, seventeen arrows were shot "into his coat of mail, " and he was woundedin unprotected parts of his person. He was twice deputy to the GeneralCourt. In 1644, the General Court organized an elaborate system ofexternal defence, the whole based upon Castle Island, now FortIndependence, in Boston Harbor. From that point, hostile invasion by anaval force was to be repelled. Every vessel, on entering, was toreport to the castle, be examined and subject to the orders of thecommandant. It became the military headquarters of the colony, theprotection and oversight of whose commerce were intrusted to theofficer in command. This was the highest military station and trust inthe gift of the Government. It was assigned to Richard Davenport; andhe held it for twenty-one years, to the moment of his death. Thecountry reposed in confidence upon his watchful fidelity. He put andkept the castle in an efficient condition. In 1659, as evidence oftheir satisfaction and approval of his official conduct, the GeneralCourt made him a grant of five hundred acres of land laid out inLancaster. On the 15th of July, 1665, he was killed by lightning, athis post. The records of the General Court speak of "the solemn strokeof thunder that took away Captain Davenport. " The whole countrymourned the loss of the veteran soldier; and the Court granted hisfamily an additional tract of one hundred acres of land on theMerrimac River. He was in his sixtieth year at the time of his death. Of the company required to be raised in Salem for the Block-IslandExpedition, in 1636, the three commissioned officers were furnishedfrom the Farms, --Trask, Davenport, and Read. They were soldiers bynature and instinct, and to the end. The volleys of devoted, faithful, and mourning comrades were fired over their graves, with no greatinterval of time. United in early service, separated by the course oftheir lives, they were united again in death. 

Thomas Lothrop originally lived in the town, between Collins Cove andthe North River. He became a member of the First Church in Salem, andwas admitted a freeman in 1634. He soon removed to the Farms; and hisname appears among the rate-payers at the formation of the villageparish. For many years he was deputy from Salem to the General Court;and after Beverly was set off, as his residence at the time was onthat side of the line, he was always in the General Court, as deputyfrom the new town, when his other public employments permitted. No manwas ever more identified with the history of the Salem Farms. Hecontributed to form the structure of its society, and the character ofits population, by all that a wise and good man could do. During hiswhole life in America, he was more or less engaged in the militaryservice, in arduous, difficult, and dangerous positions andoperations; acting sometimes against Indians, and sometimes againstthe French, or, as was usually the case, against them both combined. He was occasionally sent to distant posts; commanding expeditions tothe eastward as far as Acadia. He was at one time in charge of a forceat Port Royal, now Annapolis, Nova Scotia. Increase Mather calls him a"godly and courageous commander. " When the last decisive struggle withKing Philip was approaching, and aid was needed from the eastern partof the colony to rescue the settlements on the Connecticut River fromutter destruction, the "Flower of Essex" was summoned to the field. Itwas a choice body of efficient men, "all culled out of the townsbelonging to this county, " numbering about one hundred men. Lothrop, of course, was their captain. In August, 1675, they were on the groundat Hadley, the place of rendezvous. On the 26th of that month, CaptainLothrop, with his company, and Captain Beers, of Watertown, with his, after a vigorous pursuit, attacked the Indians in a swamp, about tenmiles from Hatfield, at the foot of Sugar-Loaf Hill. Ten were killedon the side of the English, and twenty-six on the side of the Indians, who were driven from the swamp, and scattered in their flight; tofall, as was their custom, upon detached settlements; and continuingto waste and destroy, by fire and sword, with hatchet, scalping-knife, torch, and gun. On the 18th of September, Lothrop, with his company, started from Deerfield, to convoy a train ofeighteen wagons, loaded with grain, and furniture of the inhabitantsseeking refuge from danger, with teamsters and others. Moseley, withhis men, remained behind, to scout the woods, and give notice of theapproach of Indians; but the stealthy savages succeeded in effecting acomplete surprise, and fell upon Lothrop as his wagons were crossing astream. They poured in a destructive fire from the woods, in alldirections. They were seven to one. A perfect carnage ensued. Lothropfell early in the unequal fight, and only seven or eight of his wholeparty were left to tell the story of the fatal scene. The locality ofthis disastrous and sanguinary tragedy has ever since been known as"Bloody Brook. " In the list of those who perished by bullet, tomahawk, or arrow, on that fearful morning, we read the names of many villageneighbors of the brave and lamented commander, --Thomas Bayley, EdwardTrask, Josiah Dodge, Peter Woodbury, Joseph Balch, Thomas Buckley, Joseph King, Robert Wilson, and James Tufts. One of Lothrop'ssergeants, who was among the slain, Thomas Smith, then of Newbury, originated in the village. His family had grants of land, includingthe hill called by their name. 

Captain Lothrop was as remarkable for the benevolence of his spiritand the tenderness of his nature as for his wisdom in council, energyin command, or gallantry in battle. Indeed, his character in privatelife was so beautiful and lovable, that I cannot refrain from leadingyou into the recesses of his domestic circle. It presents a picture ofrare attractiveness. He had no children. His wife was a kind andamiable person. They longed for objects upon which to gratify theyearnings of their affectionate hearts. He had a large estate. Hischaracter became known to the neighbors and the country people around. If there was an occurrence calling for commiseration anywhere in thevicinity, it was managed to bring it to his notice. Orphan childrenwere received into his household, and brought up with parental careand tenderness. Many were, in this way, the objects of his charity andaffections. Persons especially, who were in any degree connected withhis wife's family, naturally conceived the desire to have him adopttheir children. This was the case particularly with those who were instraitened circumstances. Others, knowing his disposition, would bringtales of distress and destitution to his ears. Some, perhaps, turnedout to be unworthy of his goodness. In one instance, at least, wherehe had taken a child into his family in its infancy, touched byappeals made to his compassion by the parents, brought it upcarefully, watched over its education, and become attached to it, whenit had reached an age to be serviceable, the parents claimed andinsisted on their right to it, and took it away, much against hiswill. But the good man's benevolence was not impaired, nor the streamof his affectionate charities checked, by the misconduct oringratitude of his wards or of their friends. His plan was to do allthe good in his power to the children thus brought into his family, toprepare them for usefulness, and start them favorably in life. In thecase of boys, he would get them apprenticed to worthy people in usefulcallings. At the time of his death, there were two grown-up members ofhis family, who appear to have been foisted upon his care in theirearliest childhood. But there was no blame to be attached to them inthe premises; and they were regarded by him with much affection. Therewere no relations of his own in this country in need of charitable aidor without adequate parental protection; and it was not strange thatseveral of his wife's connections should have availed themselves ofthe benefit of his generous disposition. She herself gives a veryinteresting account of an instance of this sort, in a deposition foundwrapped up among some old papers in the county court-house. The objectof the statement was to explain how a connection of hers becamedomesticated in the family. 

 "When the child's mother was dead, my husband being with me at my cousin's burial, and seeing our friends in so sad a condition, the poor babe having lost its mother, and the woman that nursed it being fallen sick, I then did say to some of my friends, that, if my husband would give me leave, I could be very willing to take my cousin's little one for a while, till he could better dispose of it; whereupon the child's father did move it to my husband. My dear husband, considering my weakness, and the incumbrance I had in the family, was pleased to return this answer, --that he did not see how it was possible for his wife to undergo such a burden. The next day there came a friend to our house, a woman which gave suck, and she understanding how the poor babe was left, being intreated, was willing to take it to nurse, and forthwith it was brought to her: but it had not been with her three weeks before it pleased the Lord to visit that nurse with sickness also; and the nurse's mother came to me desiring I would take the child from her daughter, and then my dear husband, observing the providence of God, was freely willing to receive her into his house. "

At the time when this addition was made to his family, there wascertainly already in it another of his wife's connections, who hadbeen brought there when an infant in a manner perhaps equallysingular, and who had grown up to maturity. The particular"incumbrance, " however, spoken of by her, related to another matter. She was an only daughter. Her father had died many years before, atquite an advanced age. Her mother, who was sickly and infirm as wellas aged, was taken immediately into her family, and remained under herroof until her death. In her weak and helpless condition, much careand exertion were thrown upon her daughter. The only objection thecaptain seemed to have to increasing the burden of the household, byreceiving into it this additional child with its nurse, resulted fromconjugal tenderness and considerateness. It must be confessed thatthere are some indications of well-arranged management in theforegoing account. The friend who happened to call at the house the"next day, " and who was able to supply what the "poor babe" needed, certainly came very opportunely; and there was altogether a remarkableconcurrence and sequence of circumstances. But all that he saw was acase of suffering, helpless innocence, and an opportunity forbenevolence and charity; and in these, with a true theology, he read"a providence of God. " That child continued, to the hour when he tookhis last farewell of his family, beneath his roof, and was an objectof affectionate care, and in her amiable qualities a source ofhappiness to him and his good wife. It is stated that the children, thus from time to time domesticated in the family, called him father, and that he addressed them as his children. While they were infants, he was "a tender nursing father" to them. When fondling them in hisarms, in the presence of his wife, he would solemnly take notice ofthe providence of God that had "disposed of them from one place toanother" until they had been brought to him; and "would present themin his desires to God, and implore a blessing upon them. "

The picture presented in the foregoing details is worth rescuing fromoblivion. Such instances of actual life, exhibited in the most privatespheres, constitute a branch of history more valuable, in somerespects, than the public acts of official dignitaries. History hasbeen too exclusively confined, in its materials, to the movements ofstates and of armies. It ought to paint the portraits of individualmen and women in their common lives; it ought to lead us into theinterior of society, and introduce us to the family circles and homeexperiences of the past. It cannot but do us good to know ThomasLothrop, not only as an early counsellor among the legislators of thecolony, and as having immortalized by his blood a memorable field ofbattle and slaughter, but as the centre of a happy and virtuoushousehold on a New England farm. He made that home happy by hisbenignant virtue. Although denied the blessing of children of his own, his fireside was enlivened with the prattle and gayeties of the young. Joy and hope and growth were within his walls. He was not a parent;but his heart was kept warm with parental affections. He had a homewhere dear ones waited for him, and rushed out to meet and cling roundhim with loving arms, and welcome him with merry voices, when hereturned from the sessions of the General Court, or from campaignsagainst the French and Indians. 

Besides these offices of beneficence in the domestic sphere, we findtraces, in the local records, of constant usefulness and kindnessamong his rural neighbors. He was called, on all occasions, to adviseand assist. As a judicious friend, he was relied upon and sought atthe bedside of the sick and dying, and in families bereaved of theirhead. His name appears as a witness to wills, appraiser of estates, trustee and guardian of the young. He was the friend of all. I knownot where to find a more perfect union of the hero and the Christian;of all that is manly and chivalrous with all that is tender, benevolent, and devout. 

Somewhere about the year 1650, after he had been married aconsiderable time, he revisited his native country. A sister, Ellen, had, in the mean while, grown up from early childhood; and he foundher all that a fond brother could have hoped for. With muchpersuasion, he besought his mother to allow her to return with him toAmerica. He stated that he had no children; that he would be a fatherto her, and watch over and care for her as for his own child. Atlength the mother yielded, and committed her daughter to his custody, not without great reluctance, trusting to his fraternal affection andplighted promise. He brought her over with him to his American home. She was worthy of his love, and he was true to his sacred and precioustrust. 

Ellen Lothrop became the wife of Ezekiel Cheever, the greatschoolmaster; and I should consider myself false to all good learning, if I allowed the name of this famous old man to slip by, withoutpausing to pay homage to it. His record, as a teacher of a LatinGrammar School, is unrivalled. Twelve years at New Haven, eleven atIpswich, nine at Charlestown, and more than thirty-eight atBoston, --more than seventy in all, --may it not be safely said that hewas one of the very greatest benefactors of America? With ElijahCorlett, who taught a similar school at Cambridge for more than fortyyears, he bridged over the wide chasm between the education broughtwith them by the fathers from the old country, and the education thatwas reared in the new. They fed and kept alive the lamp of learningthrough the dark age of our history. All the scholars raised here weretrained by them. One of Cotton Mather's most characteristicproductions is the tribute to his venerated master. It flows from aheart warm with gratitude. "Although he had usefully spent his lifeamong children, yet he was not become twice a child, " but held hisfaculties to the last. "In this great work of bringing our sons to bemen, he was my master seven and thirty years ago, was master to mybetters no less than seventy years ago; so long ago, that I must evenmention my father's tutor for one of them. He was a Christian of theold fashion, --an old New England Christian; and I may tell you, thatwas as venerable a sight, as the world, since the days of primitiveChristianity, has ever looked upon. He lived, as a master, the termwhich has been, for above three thousand years, assigned for the lifeof a man. " Mather celebrated his praises in a poetical effusion:--

 "He lived, and to vast age no illness knew, Till Time's scythe, waiting for him, rusty grew. He lived and wrought; his labors were immense, But ne'er declined to preterperfect tense. 

 * * * * *

 'Tis Corlett's pains, and Cheever's, we must own, That thou, New England, art not Scythia grown. "

To our early schoolmasters, as Mather says, and the later too, I mayadd, it is owing, that the whole country did not become anotherScythia. 

Ezekiel Cheever was in this country as early as 1637. He was then inNew Haven, sharing in the work of the first settlement of that colony, teaching school as his ordinary employment, but sometimes preaching, and in other ways helping to lay the foundations of church andcommonwealth. While there, he had a family of several children. Thefirst-born, Samuel, became the minister of Marblehead. In 1650, he waskeeping a school at Ipswich. About this time, he lost his wife. On the18th of November, 1652, he married Ellen, the sister whom CaptainLothrop had brought with him from England. They had several children;one of them, Thomas, was ordained first at Malden, and afterwards atChelsea. The old schoolmaster died on the 21st of August, 1708, agedninety-three years and seven months. His son Thomas reached the sameage. Samuel, the minister at Marblehead, was eighty-five years old athis death. The name of Ezekiel, jr. , appears on the rate-list of thevillage parish as late as 1731, so that he must have reached the ageof at least seventy-seven years. 

The antiquarians have been sorely perplexed in determining therelationship of the Cheevers and Reas, as they appear to be connectedtogether as heirs of the Lothrop property, in an order of the GeneralCourt of the 11th of June, 1681. 

The facts are these: Captain Lothrop married Bethia, daughter ofDaniel Rea. He died without issue, and had made no will. As he waskilled in battle, his widow undertook to set up a nuncupative will. Asnow-storm, on the day appointed to act upon the matter, so blocked upthe roads, that neither Ezekiel Cheever nor his son Thomas, who hadcharge of his mother's rights, could get to Salem; and the courtgranted administration to the widow. The Cheevers demanded arehearing: it was granted; and quite an interesting and pertinaciouslaw-suit arose, which was finally carried up to the General Court, whodecided it in 1681. The widow does not appear to have been actuated bymerely selfish motives, but sought to divert a portion of the landedestate from the only legal heir, Ellen, the wife of Ezekiel Cheever, to other parties, in favor of whom her feelings were much enlisted. There is no indication of any unfriendliness between her and her"sister Cheever. "

Lothrop's wife had become much attached to one of her connections, whohad been brought into the family. Her husband, having been fond ofchildren, had often expressed great affection for those of herbrother, Joshua Rea. He had also sometimes, in expressing his interestin the Beverly Church, evinced a disposition to leave to it "his tenacre lot and his house upon the same, " as a parsonage. Perhaps, if hehad not been suddenly called away, he might have done something, particularly for the latter object. It appeared in evidence, from herstatements and from others, that he had been importuned to make awill, and that it was much on his mind, particularly when recoveringfrom a long and dangerous sickness the winter before his death; but henever could be brought to do it. There was no evidence that he hadever absolutely determined on any thing positively or specifically. His widow, who seems to have been a perfectly honest and truthfulwoman, testified to a conversation that passed between them on thesubject, as they were riding "together towards Wenham, the lastspring, in the week before the Court of election. " In passing byparticular pieces of property owned by him, he indulged in somespeculations as to what disposal he should make of this or thatpasture or plain or woodland. But she did not represent that hisexpressions were absolute and determinate, but rather indicative ofthe then inclination of his mind. In another part of her statement, she said, "I did desire him to make his will, which, when he was sick, I did more than once or twice; and his answer to me was, that he didlook upon it as that which was very requisite and fit should be done. But, dear wife, thou hast no cause to be troubled; if I should die andnot make a will, it would be never the worse for thee; thyself wouldhave the more. " It is not difficult to understand the case as itprobably stood in the mind of Captain Lothrop. Whenever the subject ofmaking a will, and doing kind things for the Beverly parish, and theindividuals in whose behalf his wife was so anxious, was brought up, he felt the force, as he expressed it, "of the duty which God requiredof a master of a family to set his house in order;" and he was nodoubt strongly moved, and sometimes almost resolved, to gratify herwishes: but he remembered the solemn promise he had made to hismother, as he parted from her for ever, and received his sister fromher hands, and every sentiment of honor, and of filial and fraternallove, restrained him; and his mind settled into a conviction that itwas his duty to allow his sister the benefit of the final inheritanceof his property. As the particular persons to whom his wife wished himto make bequests were her relatives, and the law would give her anample allowance in the use, for life, of his large landed property, she would be able to provide for them after his death, as he had beenin the habit of doing. 

The General Court took a just view of the case, and decided that sheshould have the whole movable estate for her own "use and dispose, "and the "use and benefit" for life of the houses and lands, "making nostrip nor waste;" after her death, the same to go to Ellen, the wifeof Ezekiel Cheever. The widow was to pay all debts due from theestate, and also twenty pounds to the children of her brother, JoshuaRea. The Court seemed to think, that, if any expectations had beenexcited in that quarter, she was fully as responsible for it as herlate husband; and, as the Cheevers were to get nothing, while shelived, out of the estate, the Court required her to pay the sum justnamed to her nephews and nieces. They ordered Ezekiel Cheever to payfive pounds as costs for their hearing the case, which he did on thespot. 

It may be mentioned, by the way, that the widow of Captain Lothrop wasmarried again within eight months of his death; but that was quiteusual in those days. She and her new husband concluded that it wouldbe troublesome to take care of Captain Lothrop's several farms. Theypreferred to live in the town. She was probably over sixty years ofage. The conclusion of the whole matter was, that, in consideration ofsixty pounds paid down, they surrendered all claim whatever to the"houseing and lands" left by Captain Lothrop, to Cheever and his wife. They conveyed them "free and clear of and from all debts owing fromthe estate of said Lothrop, and gifts or bequests pretended to be madeby him, or by any ways or means to be had, claimed, or challengedtherefrom by any person or persons whomsoever. " The relict of CaptainLothrop died in 1688. 

Ezekiel Cheever and his wife, having thus become possessed of all herbrother's real estate, conveyed the lands belonging to it in SalemVillage to their son, Ezekiel Cheever, Jr. He had, for some years, been living in the town of Salem, carrying on the business of atailor. He was a member of the First Church, and appears to have beena respectable person. His dwelling-house stood on the lot inWashington Street occupied by the late Robert Brookhouse. He sold itto the Rev. Nicholas Noyes, on the 14th of April, 1684, removed to thevillage, took possession of the Lothrop farm, and was there in time tobear a share in the witchcraft delusion. 

In 1636, a grant of land was made to Thomas Gardner of one hundredacres. He came to this country as early as 1624, and resided at CapeAnn. Subsequently he removed to Salem, and, with his wife, wasadmitted to the church. He was deputy to the General Court in 1637. His grant was in the western part of the township, and embraced landincluded within the limits of Salem Village. The name still remains onthe same territory. His sons became proprietors of several additionaltracts in the neighborhood. One of them, Joseph, is connected, in themost conspicuous and interesting manner, with our military history. 

The destruction of Captain Lothrop and his company, on the 18th ofSeptember, filled the country with grief and consternation; and, asthe year 1675 drew towards a close, the conviction became general, that the crisis of the fate of the colonies was near at hand. TheIndians were carrying all before them. Philip was spreadingconflagration, devastation, and slaughter around the borders, andstriking sudden and deadly blows into the heart of the country. It wasevident that he was consolidating the Indian power into irresistiblestrength. Among papers on file in the State House is a letteraddressed to the governor and council, dated at Mendon, Oct. 1, 1675, from Lieutenant Phinehas Upham, of Malden. In command of a company, acting under Captain Gorham of Barnstable, who had also a company ofhis own, he had been on a scout for Indians beyond Mendon, which was afrontier town. Their route had been over a sweep of territory then analmost unbroken wilderness, embracing the present sites of Grafton, Worcester, Oxford, and Dudley. The result of the exploration is thusgiven: "Now, seeing that in all our marches we find no Indians, weverily think that they are drawn together into great bodies far remotefrom these parts. " From other scouting parties, it became evident thatthis opinion was correct, and that the Indians were collecting storesand assembling their warriors somewhere, to fall upon the colonies atthe first opening of spring. Further information made it certain, thattheir place of gathering was in the Narragansett country, in thesouth-westerly part of the colony of Rhode Island. There was noalternative but, as a last effort, to strike the enemy at that point, with the utmost available force. A thousand men were raised, 527 byMassachusetts, 315 by Connecticut, and 158 by Plymouth. Massachusettsorganized a company of cavalry and six companies of foot soldiers, Connecticut five and Plymouth two companies of foot. All were placedunder the command of Governor Winslow, of Plymouth. The winter had setin earlier than usual; much snow had fallen, and the weather wasextremely cold. The seven companies of Massachusetts, under thecommand of Major Samuel Appleton of Ipswich, started on their march, Dec. 10. On the evening of the 12th, having effected a junction withthe Plymouth companies, they reached the rendezvous, on the north sideof Wickford Hill, in North Kingston, R. I. On the 13th, Winslowcommenced his move upon the enemy. On the 18th, the Connecticuttroops joined him. His army was complete; the enemy was known to benear, and all haste made to reach him. The snow was deep. TheNarragansetts were intrenched on a somewhat elevated piece of groundof five or six acres in area, surrounded by a swamp, within the limitsof the present town of South Kingston. The Indian camp was stronglyfortified by a double row of palisades, about a rod apart, and also bya thick hedge. There was but a single entrance known to our troops, which could only be reached, one at a time, over a slanting log orfelled tree, slippery from frost and falling snow, about six feetabove a ditch. There were other passages, known only to the Indians, by which they could steal out, a few at a time, and get a shot at ourpeople in the flank and rear. Many of our men were cut off in thisway. The allied forces had expected to pass the night, previous toreaching the hostile camp, at a garrison about fifteen miles distantfrom that point; but the Indians had destroyed the buildings, andslaughtered the occupants, seventeen in number, two days before. Herethe troops passed the night, unsheltered from the bitter weather. Thenext day, Dec. 19, was Sunday; but their provisions were exhausted, and the supply they had expected to find had been destroyed with thegarrison-house. There could be no delay. They recommenced their march, at half-past five o'clock in the morning, through the deep snow, whichcontinued falling all day, and reached the borders of what wasdescribed, by a writer well acquainted with it, as "a hideous swamp. "Fortunately, the early and long-continued extreme cold weather of thatwinter had rendered it more passable than it otherwise would havebeen. But the ground was rough, and very difficult to traverse. Theywere chilled and worn by their long march, following winding pathsthrough thick woods, across gullies, and over hills and fields. It wasbetween one and two o'clock in the afternoon, and the short winter daywas wearing away. Winslow saw the position at a glance, and, by thepromptness of his decision, proved himself a great captain. He orderedan instant assault. The Massachusetts troops were in the van; thePlymouth, with the commander-in-chief, in the centre; the Connecticut, in the rear. The Indians had erected a block-house near the entrance, filled with sharp-shooters, who also lined the palisades. The menrushed on, although it was into the jaws of death, under an unerringfire. The block-house told them where the entrance was. The companiesof Moseley and Davenport led the way. Moseley succeeded in passingthrough. Davenport fell beneath three fatal shots, just within theentrance. Isaac Johnson, captain of the Roxbury company, was killedwhile on the log. But death had no terrors to that army. The centreand rear divisions pressed up to support the front and fill the gaps;and all equally shared the glory of the hour. Enough survived theterrible passage to bring the Indians to a hand-to-hand fight withinthe fort. After a desperate struggle of nearly three hours, thesavages were driven from their stronghold; and, with the setting ofthat sun, their power was broken. Philip's fortunes had received adecided overthrow, and the colonies were saved. In all militaryhistory, there is not a more daring exploit. Never, on any field, hasmore heroic prowess been displayed. By the best computations, theIndian loss was at least one thousand, including the large numbers whoperished from cold, as they scattered in their flight without shelter, food, or place of refuge. Of the colonial force, over eighty werekilled, and one hundred and fifty wounded. Three of the Massachusettscaptains--Johnson, Gardner, and Davenport--were killed on the spot. Three of the Connecticut captains--John Gallop, Samuel Marshall, andRobert Seely--also fell in the fight. Captain William Bradford, ofPlymouth, was wounded by a musket-ball, which he carried in his bodyto his grave. Captain John Gorham, also of the Plymouth colony, wasshortly after carried off by a fever, occasioned by theover-exhaustion of the march and the battle. Lieutenant PhinehasUpham, of Johnson's company, was mortally wounded. Great value appearsto have been attached to the services of this officer. In the hurriedpreparation for the campaign, Captain Johnson had nominated hisbrother as his lieutenant. The General Court overruled theappointment. Johnson cheerfully acquiesced, and, in a paper addressedto the Court, assured them that he "most readily submitted to theirchoice of Lieutenant Upham. " This single passage is an imperishableeulogium upon the characters of the two brave men who gave theirlives to the country on that fatal but glorious day. 

Captain Gardner's company was raised in this neighborhood. JosephPeirce and Samuel Pikeworth of Salem, and Mark Bachelder of Wenham, were killed before entering the fort. Abraham Switchell of Marblehead, Joseph Soames of Cape Ann, and Robert Andrews of Topsfield, werekilled at the fort. Charles Knight, Thomas Flint, and Joseph Houlton, Jr. , of Salem Village; Nicholas Hakins and John Farrington, of Lynn;Robert Cox, of Marblehead; Eben Baker and Joseph Abbot, of Andover;Edward Harding, of Cape Ann; and Christopher Read, of Beverly, --werewounded. An account of the death of Captain Gardner, in detail, hasbeen preserved. The famous warrior, and final conqueror of KingPhilip, Benjamin Church, was in the fight as a volunteer, renderedefficient service, and was wounded. His "History of King Philip's War"is reprinted, by John Kimball Wiggin, as one of his series of eleganteditions of rare and valuable early colonial publications entitled"Library of New England History. " In the second number, Part I. OfChurch's history is edited by Henry Martyn Dexter. Church's account ofwhat came within his observation in this fight, with the notes of thelearned editor, is the most valuable source of information we have inreference to it. He says, that, in the heat of the battle, he cameacross Gardner, "amidst the wigwams in the east end of the fort, making towards him; but, on a sudden, while they were looking eachother in the face, Captain Gardner settled down. " He instantly went tohim. The blood was running over his cheek. Church lifted up his cap, calling him by name. "Gardner looked up in his face, but spoke not aword, being mortally shot through the head. " The widow of CaptainGardner (Ann, sister of Sir George Downing) became the successor ofAnn Dudley, the celebrated poetess of her day, by marrying GovernorBradstreet, in 1680. She died in 1713. 

There is a curious parallelism between the first and the last greatvictory over the Indian power in the history of America. An intervalof one hundred and sixty one years separates them. On the 19th ofDecember, 1836, --the anniversary of the day when Winslow stormed theNarragansett fort, --Colonel Taylor received his orders to pursue theFlorida Indians. It was a last attempt to subdue them. They had longbaffled and defied the whole power of the United States. Every generalin the army had laid down his laurels in inglorious and utter failure. He started on the 20th, with an army of about one thousand men. On the25th, he found himself on the edge of a swamp, impassable by artilleryor horses. On the opposite side were the Indian warriors, ready todeal destruction, if he should attempt to cross the swamp. He had thesame question to decide which Winslow had; and he decided it in thesame way, with equal promptness. The struggle lasted about the sametime; and the loss, in proportion to the numbers engaged, was aboutthe same. The results were alike permanently decisive. Okee-cho-beestands by the side of Narragansett, and the names of Josiah Winslowand Zachary Taylor are imperishably inscribed together on the tabletsof military glory. 

Dr. Palfrey says that Captain Nathaniel Davenport was a son of"Davenport of the Pequot War. " He was born in Salem, and brought up inthe village. His name, with those of his brave father, and hisassociate in youth and in death Joseph Gardner, belongs to our localannals. They were both the idols of their men. Davenport was dressed, when he fell, in a "full buff suit, " and was probably thought by theIndians to be the commander-in-chief. On receiving his triple wound, he called his lieutenant, Edward Tyng, to him, gave him his gun incharge, delivered over to him the command of his company, and died. 

There has been some uncertainty on the point whether NathanielDavenport was a son of Richard, the commandant at the castle. The factthat he was associated with William Stoughton, and Stephen Minot whosewife was a daughter of Richard Davenport, as an administrator of theestate of the latter, has been regarded as rendering it probable. Dr. Palfrey's unhesitating statement to that effect is, of itself, enoughto settle the question. There is, moreover, a document on file whichproves that he is correct. Nathaniel's widow had some difficulty insettling his estate, and applied to the General Court for itsinterposition. Quite a mass of papers belong to the case. Among themis a bill of expenses incurred by her in connection with his funeralcharges, such as, "twenty-one rings to relatives, " and to those "whotook care to bring him off slain, eight pounds;" and "for mourning formy mother Davenport, sisters Minot and Elliot, and myself, sixteenpounds. " This latter item is decisive, as we know that two of RichardDavenport's daughters married persons of those names. It is acircumstance of singular interest, as showing by how slight anaccident--for it is a mere accident--important questions of historyare sometimes determinable. This item, so far as I have been able tofind, is the only absolute evidence we have to the point that Richardwas the father of Nathaniel Davenport; and it would not have been inexistence, had not questions arisen in the settlement of the estate ofthe latter requiring the action of the General Court. The record ofbaptisms in the First Church at Salem, prior to 1636, is lost. Thenames of Richard Davenport's children, baptized subsequent to thatdate, are in the records of the Salem or Boston churches. As Nathanielis understood to have been one of the earliest born, the record of hisbaptism was probably in the lost part of the Salem book. 

It may be thought surprising, that so little appears to have beenknown concerning an officer of his rank and parentage, and whose deathhas rendered his name so memorable. To account for it, I must recur tothe history of the Narragansett expedition. No military organizationwas ever more rapidly effected, or more thoroughly and promptlyexecuted its work. The commissioners of the three united colonies weresatisfied that the Indian rendezvous at Narragansett, where theirforces and stores were being collected and their resourcesconcentrated, must be struck at without a moment's delay; that theblow must be swift and decisive; that it must be struck then, in thedepth of winter; that, if deferred to the spring, all would be lost;that, if the Indian power was allowed to remain and to gather strengthuntil the next season, nothing could save the settlements fromdestruction. Early in November, they formed their plan, and put themachinery for summoning all their utmost resources into instantaction. On the 30th of November, the officers appointed for thepurpose made return, that they had impressed the required number inthe several counties and towns, fitted them out with arms, ammunition, clothes, and all necessary equipments; that the men were on theground, ready to go forward. There was no time for recruiting, orraising bounties, or substitute brokerage; no time for electioneeringto get commissions. The rank and file were ready: they had beenbrought in by a process that gave no time for canvassing for offices. A summons had been left at the house of every drafted man, to reporthimself the next morning. If any one failed to appear, some othermember of the family, brother or father, had to take his place. Theorganizing and officering of this force must be done instanter. Alldepended upon suitable officers being selected. A company was waitingat Boston for a captain, and a captain must be found. Some one inauthority happened to think of Nathaniel Davenport. His childhood andyouth had been passed at Salem Village and on Castle Island: onreaching maturity, he had removed to New York, and been there foryears in commercial pursuits. A short time before, he had returned toBoston, and engaged in business there. His father had been dead since1665, and not many persons knew him, --only, perhaps, a few of hisearly associates, and the old friends of his father: but they knew, that, from his birth to his manhood, he had breathed a militaryatmosphere, --was a soldier, by inheritance, of the school of Lothrop, Read, and Trask; and it was determined at once to hunt him up. He wasserving at Court; taken out of the jury-box in a pending trial; andplaced at the head of the company. The accurate historian of Boston, Samuel G. Drake, says, "Captain Davenport's men were extremely grievedat the death of their leader; he having, by his courteous carriage, much attached them to himself, although he was a stranger to most ofthem when he was appointed their captain. On which occasion he made 'avery civil speech, ' and allowed them to choose their sergeantsthemselves. " He had no time to settle his accounts, arrange hisaffairs, or confer with any one, but led his company at once to therendezvous. These circumstances, perhaps, partially explain why solittle seems to have been known of him in Boston, or to localwriters. 

Besides Captains Gardner and Davenport and the men whose names havebeen mentioned as killed or wounded, there were in the Narragansettfight the following from Salem Village and its farming neighborhood:John Dodge, William Dodge, William Raymond, Thomas Raymond, JohnRaymond, Joseph Herrick, Thomas Putnam, Jr. , Thomas Abbey, RobertLeach, and Peter Prescott. There may have been others: no full roll ison record. The foregoing are gathered from partial returnsmiscellaneously collected in the files at the State House. The Dodges(sometimes the name is written Dodds, which appears, I think, to havebeen its original form), and the Raymonds (sometimes written Rayment), were, from the first, conspicuous in military affairs. A few wordsexplanatory of their relation to the village may be here properlygiven. 

On the 25th of January, 1635, the town of Salem voted to WilliamTrask, John Woodbury, Roger Conant, Peter Palfrey, and John Balch, atract of land, as follows: "Two hundred acres apiece together lying, being at the head of Bass River, one hundred and twenty-four poles inbreadth, and so running northerly to the river by the great pond side, and so in breadth, making up the full quantity of a thousand acres. "These men were original settlers, having been in the country for sometime before Endicott's arrival. This circumstance gave to them andothers the distinguishing title of "old planters. " The grant of athousand acres, comprising the five farms above mentioned, was alwaysknown as "the Old Planters' Farms. " The first proprietors of them, and their immediate successors, appear to have arranged and managedthem in concert, --to have had homesteads near together between thehead of Bass River and the neighborhood of the "horse bridge, " wherethe meeting-house of the Second Congregational Society of Beverly, orof the "Precinct of Salem and Beverly" now stands. Their woodlands andpasture lands were further to the north and east. An inspection of themap will give an idea of the general locality of the "Old Planters'Farms" in the aggregate--above the head of Bass River, extendingnortherly towards "the river, " as the Ipswich River was called, andeasterly to the "great pond, " that is, Wenham Lake. Conant, Woodbury, and Balch occupied their lands at once. I have stated how Trask'sportion of the grant went into the hands of Scruggs, and then of JohnRaymond. Palfrey is thought never to have occupied his portion. Hesold it to William Dodge, the founder of the family of that name, known by way of eminence as "Farmer Dodge, " whose wife was a daughterof Conant. A portion of the grant assigned to Conant was sold by oneof his descendants to John Chipman, who, on the 28th of December, 1715, was ordained as the first minister of the "Second BeverlySociety. " He was the grandfather of Ward Chipman, Judge of the SupremeCourt, and for some time President, of the Province of New Brunswick, and whose son of the same name was chief-justice of that court. He wasalso grandfather of the wife of the great merchant, William Gray, whose family has contributed such invaluable service to theliterature, legislation, judicial learning, and general welfare of thecountry. The Rev. Mr. Chipman was the ancestor of many otherdistinguished persons. The house in which he lived is still standing, near the site of the church in which he preached. It is occupied byhis descendants, bearing his name, and, although much time-worn, hasthe marks of having been a structure of a very superior order for thatday. The venerable mansion stands back from the road, on a smooth andbeautiful lawn, bordered by a solid stone wall of even lines andsurfaces. In these respects it well compares with any countryresidence upon which taste, skill, and wealth have, in more recenttimes, been bestowed. 

The dividing line between Beverly and Salem Village, as seen on themap, finally agreed upon in 1703, ran through the "Old Planters'Farms, " particularly the portions belonging to the Dodges, Raymonds, and Woodbury. It went through "Captain John Dodge's dwelling-house, six foot to the eastward of his brick chimney as it now stands. " Atthe time of the witchcraft delusion, the Raymonds and Dodges mostlybelonged to the Salem Village parish and church. They continued on therate-list, and connected with the proceedings entered on therecord-books, until the meeting-house at the "horse bridge" was openedfor worship, in 1715, when they transferred their relations to the"Precinct of Salem and Beverly. "

When Sir William Phipps got up his expedition against Quebec, in1690, William Raymond raised a company from the neighborhood; and sodeep was the impression made upon the public mind by his ability andcourage, and so long did it remain in vivid remembrance, that, in1735, the General Court granted a township of land, six miles square, "to Captain William Raymond, and the officers and soldiers" under hiscommand, and "to their heirs, " for their distinguished services in the"Canada Expedition. " The grant was laid out on the Merrimack, but, being found within the bounds of New Hampshire, a tract of equivalentvalue was substituted for it on the Saco River. Among the men whoserved in this expedition was Eleazer, a son of Captain John Putnam, who afterwards, for many years, was one of the deacons of the SalemVillage Church. 

The short, rapid, sharp, and sanguinary campaign against theNarragansetts seems to have tried to the utmost, not only the courageand spirit of the men, but the powers of human endurance. Theconstitutions of many were permanently impaired. As much fatigue andsuffering were crowded into that short month as the physical forces ofstrong men could bear. We find such entries as this in thetown-books:--"Salem, 1683. Samuel Beadle, who lost his health in theNarragansett Expedition, is allowed to take the place of Mr. Stephensas an innkeeper. " A petition, dated in 1685, is among the papers inthe State House, signed by men from Lynn, the Village, Beverly, Reading, and Hingham, praying for a grant of land, for their servicesand sufferings in that expedition. The petition was granted. Thefollowing extract from it tells the story: "We think we have reason tofear our days may be much shortened by our hard service in the war, from the pains and aches of our bodies, that we feel in our bones andsinews, and lameness thereby taking hold of us much, especially in thespring and fall. "

While there is "reason to fear" that the days of many were shortened, there were some so tough as to survive the strain, and bid defiance toaches and pains, and almost to time itself. In a list of fourteen whowent from Beverly, six, including Thomas Raymond and Lott, adescendant of Roger Conant, were alive in 1735!

The grants of land made to these gallant men and their heirs amountedin all, and ultimately, to seven distinct tracts, called "NarragansettTownships. " They were made in fulfilment of an express public promiseto that effect. It is stated in an official document, that"proclamation was made to them, when mustered on Dedham Plain" on the9th of December, just as they took up their march, "that, if theyplayed the man, took the fort, and drove the enemy out of theNarragansett country, which was their great seat, they should have agratuity in land, besides their wages. " The same document, which is inthe form of a message from the House of Representatives to the Councilof the Province of Massachusetts, dated Jan. 10, 1732, goes on to say, "And as the condition has been performed, certainly the promise, inall equity and justice, ought to be fulfilled. And if we consider thedifficulties these brave men went through in storming the fort in thedepth of winter, and the pinching wants they afterwards underwent inpursuing the Indians that escaped, through a hideous wilderness, knownthroughout New England to this day by the name of the _hungry march_;and if we further consider, that, until this brave though small armythus played the man, the whole country was filled with distress andfear, and we trembled in this capital, Boston itself; and that to thegoodness of God to this army we owe our fathers' and our own safetyand estates, "--therefore they urge the full discharge of theobligations of public justice and gratitude. They did not urge invain. The grants were made on a scale, that finally was liberal andhonorable to the government. 

I have dwelt at this great length on the Narragansett campaign andfight, partly because the details have not been kept as familiar tothe memory of the people as they deserve, but chiefly because theydemonstrate the military genius of the community with whose characterour subject requires us to be fully acquainted. The enthusiasm of thetroops, when Winslow gave the order for the assault, was so great, that they rushed over the swamp with an eagerness that could not berestrained, struggling as in a race to see who could first reach thelog that led into the fiery mouth of the fort. A Salem villager, JohnRaymond, was the winner. He passed through, survived the ordeal, andcame unharmed out of the terrible fight. He was twenty-seven years ofage. He signed his name to a petition to the General Court, in 1685, as having gone in the expedition from Salem Village, and as thenliving there. Some years afterwards, he removed to Middleborough, joined the church in that place in 1722, and died in 1725. The factthat his last years were spent there has led to the supposition thathe went from Middleborough to the Narragansett fight; but no men weredrafted into that army from Middleborough. It was not a town at thetime, but was organized some years afterwards. It had no inhabitantsthen. Philip had destroyed what few houses had been there, andslaughtered or dispersed their occupants. 

Thus far our attention has been directed to that portion of thepopulation of Salem Village drawn there by the original policy of thecompany in London to attract persons of superior social position, wealth, and education to take up tracts of land, and lead the way intothe interior. It operated to give a high character to the earlyagriculture of the country, and facilitate the settling of the lands. Without taking into view the means they had to make the necessaryoutlays in constructing bridges and roads, and introducing costlyimplements of husbandry and tasteful improvements, but looking solelyat the social, intellectual, and moral influence they exerted, it mustbe acknowledged that the benefit derived from them was incalculable. They gave a powerful impulse to the farming interest, and introduced ahigh tone to the spirit of the community. They were early on theground, and remained more or less through the period of the firstgeneration. Their impress was long seen in the manners and characterof the people. There was surely a goodly proportion of such men amongthe first settlers of this neighborhood. 

I come now to another class drawn along with and after thepreceding, --the permanent, substantial yeomanry with no capital buttheir sturdy industry, doing hard work with their strong arms, andstriking the roots of the settlement down deep into the soil by mixingtheir own labor with it. A glance at the map will be useful, at thispoint, showing the general direction by which the farming populationadvanced to the interior. All between the North and Cow House Riverswas, as now, called North Fields, and is still for the most part afarming territory. All north of Cow House River, westwardly to Readingand eastwardly to the sea, was originally known as the "Farms" or"Salem Farms. " When the First Beverly Parish was set off in 1667, ittook from the "Farms" all east of Bass River. As Topsfield and othertownships were established, they were more or less encroached upon. The "Farmers" as they were called, although unorganized, regardedthemselves as one community, having a common interest. The tide ofsettlement flowed up the rivers and brooks, sought out the meadows, and was drawn into the valleys among the hills. 

John Porter, called "Farmer Porter, " came with his sons from Hingham, and bought up lands to the north of Duck or Crane River. His familybefore long held among them more land, it is probable, than any other. He served many years as deputy in the General Court, first fromHingham and then from Salem. He is spoken of in the colonial recordsof Massachusetts as "of good repute for piety, integrity, and estate. "The Barneys, Leaches, and others went eastwardly towards Bass River. The Putnams followed up Beaver Brook to Beaver Dam, and spread outtowards the north and west; while Richard Hutchinson turned southerlyto the interval between Whipple and Hathorne Hills, bought theStileman grant, and cleared the beautiful meadows where the oldvillage meeting-house afterwards stood. He was a vigorous andintelligent agriculturist, and a man of character. He died in 1681, ateighty years of age, leaving a large and well-improved estate. Hiswill has this item: I give "five acres of land to Black Peter, myservant. " He had given fine farms to his children severally, manyyears before his death. His second wife, who survived him, had nochildren. He had come by her into possession of a valuable addition tohis estate. After distributing his property, and providing legaciesfor children and grandchildren, his will left it to the option of hiswidow to spend the residue of her days either in the family of his sonJoseph, or elsewhere; if she should prefer to live elsewhere, then sheshould receive back, in her own right, all the property she hadoriginally owned; if she continued to live to her death in Joseph'sfamily, then her property was to go to him and his heirs. This, Ithink, shows that he was as sagacious as he was just. 

Richard Ingersoll came from Bedfordshire in England in 1629, bringingletters of recommendation from Matthew Cradock to Governor Endicott. After living awhile in town, a tract of land of eighty acres wasgranted to him, on the east side of Wooleston River, opposite the siteof Danversport, at a place called, after him, Ingersoll's Point. Hethere proceeded to clear and break ground, plant corn, fence in hisland, and make other improvements. He also carried on a fishery. Subsequently he leased the Townsend Bishop farm, where he livedseveral years. He died in 1644. Not long before his death, hepurchased, jointly with his son-in-law Haynes, the Weston grant. Hishalf of it he bequeathed to his son Nathaniel. He was evidently a manof real dignity and worth, enjoying the friendship of the best men ofhis day. Governor Endicott and Townsend Bishop were with him in hislast sickness, and witnesses to his will. His widow married JohnKnight of Newbury. In a legal instrument filed among the papersconnected with a case of land title, dated twenty-seven years afterher first husband's death, she expresses in very striking language thetender affection and respect with which she still cherished hismemory. 

William Haynes married Sarah, daughter of Richard Ingersoll, andoccupied his half of the Weston grant. In company with his brother, Richard Haynes, he had before bought of Townsend Bishop five hundredand forty acres, covering a considerable part of the northern end ofthe village territory. They sold one-third part of it to Abraham Page. Page sold to Simon Bradstreet, and John Porter bought all the threeparts from the Hayneses and Bradstreet. It long constituted a portionof the great landed property of the Porter family. These facts showthat William Haynes was a person of means; and the manner in which heis uniformly spoken of proves that he was regarded with singularrespect and esteem. He died about 1650, and his son Thomas becamesubsequently a leading man in the village. 

There has been uncertainty where William Haynes came from, or to whatfamily of the name he belonged. Among the papers of the Ingersollfamily, it has recently been found that he is mentioned as "brother toLieutenant-Governor Haynes. " There seems to be no other person to whomthis language can refer than John Haynes, who, after being Governor ofMassachusetts, removed to Connecticut where he was governor anddeputy-governor, in alternate years, to the day of his death. JohnHaynes, as Winthrop informs us, was a gentleman of "great estate. " Hisproperty in England is stated to have yielded a thousand pounds perannum. Dr. Palfrey says he was "a man of family as well as fortune;and the dignified and courteous manners, which testified to the carebestowed on his early nurture, won popularity by their graciousness, at the same time that they diffused a refining influence by theirexample. " If William of the village was brother to John ofConnecticut, the fact that he and his brother Richard could make suchlarge purchases of lands, and the remarkable respect manifestedtowards him, are well accounted for. The Ingersoll family traditionsand entries would seem to be the highest authority on such a point. 

Job Swinnerton was a brother of John who for many years was theprincipal physician in the town of Salem. He had several grants ofland, and was a worthy, peaceable, unobtrusive citizen. He seems tohave kept out of the heat of the various contentions that occurred inthe village; and, although his influence was sometimes decisively putforth, he evidently did nothing to aggravate them. He died April 11, 1689, over eighty-eight years of age. He had a large family, and hisdescendants continue the name in the village to this day. Daniel Reacame originally to Plymouth, and in 1630 bought a dwelling-house, garden, and "all the privileges thereunto belonging, " in that town. In1632 he removed to Salem, and at once became a leading man in themanagement of town affairs. He had a grant of one hundred and sixtyacres, which he occupied and cultivated till his death in 1662. He hadbut two children: one, the wife of Captain Lothrop; the other, JoshuaRea, became the founder of a large family who acted conspicuously inthe affairs of the village for several generations. Jacob Barney wasan original grantee, and for several years a deputy. His son of thesame name became a large landholder, and, on the 5th of April, 1692, at the very moment when the witchcraft delusion was at its height, gave two acres conveniently situated for the erection of aschoolhouse. He conveyed it to inhabitants of the neighborhood to beused for that purpose, mentioning them severally by name. I give thelist, as it shows who were the principal people thereabouts at thetime: "Mr. Israel Porter; Sergeant John Leach; Cornet NathanielHoward, Sr. ; Corporal Joseph Herrick, Sr. ; Benjamin Porter; JoshuaRea, Sr. ; Thomas Raymond, Sr. ; Edward Bishop, _secundus_; John Trask, Jr. ; John Creesy; Joshua Rea, Jr. ; John Rea; John Flint, Sr. " LawrenceLeach received a grant of one hundred acres; and others of the samename and family had similar evidence that they were regarded asvaluable accessions to the population. William Dodge and RichardRaymond had grants of sixty acres each; Humphrey and William Woodburyhad forty each. The families of Leach, Raymond, Dodge, and Woodbury, still remain in the community of which their ancestors were thefounders. John Sibley had a grant of fifty acres. Robert Goodell was agrantee, and became a large landholder. 

The descendants of the two last-named persons are very numerous, andhave maintained the respectability of their family names. They areeach, at this day, represented by gentlemen whose enthusiasticinterest in our antiquities is proved by their invaluable labors andacquisitions in the interesting departments of genealogy and localhistory, --John L. Sibley, Librarian of Harvard University; and AbnerC. Goodell, Register of Probate for the County of Essex. 

Besides Townsend Bishop, there were two other persons of that nameamong the original inhabitants of Salem. They do not appear to havebeen related to him or to each other. Richard Bishop, whose wifeDulcibell had died Aug. 6, 1658, married the widow Galt, July 22, 1660. He died Dec. 30, 1674. 

Edward Bishop was in Salem in 1639, and became a member of the churchin 1645. In 1660 he was one of the constables of Salem, an originalmember of the Beverly Church in 1667, and died in January, 1695. Hewas an early settler on the Farms; his lands were on both sides ofBass River, the parcels on the west side being above and below theIpswich road. His own residence was on the Beverly side; and he wasnot usually connected with the concerns of the village. His nameappears but once in the witchcraft proceedings, and then in favor ofan accused person. 

Edward Bishop, commonly called "the sawyer, " from the tenor ofconveyances of land, dates, and other evidences, appears to have beena son of the preceding. In his earlier life, he was somewhat notablefor irregularities and aberrations of conduct. With his wife Hannah, he was fined by the local court, in 1653, for depredating upon thepremises of his neighbors. During the subsequent period of hishistory, he bore the character of an industrious and reputableperson. At some time previous to 1680, he married Bridget, widow ofThomas Oliver. On the 9th of March, 1693, he married Elizabeth Cash. He lived originally in Beverly; afterwards, at different times, on theland belonging to his father in Salem Village, --the estate he occupiedbeing on both sides of the Ipswich road. His last years were passed inthe town of Salem. He died in 1705. His daughter Hannah, born in 1646, became the wife of Captain William Raymond, one of the founders of thenumerous family of that name. 

Edward Bishop, son of the preceding, called, for distinction, "husbandman, " was born in 1648. He married Sarah, daughter of WilliamWilds, of Ipswich. He was a respectable person, and lived in thevillage on an estate also occupied by "the sawyer. " His house was westof the avenue leading to Cherry Hill. In 1703 he removed to Rehoboth. 

Edward Bishop, the eldest of his sons, married Susanna, daughter ofJohn Putnam, and in 1713 removed to that part of Ipswich now Hamilton. Prior to 1695, these four Edward Bishops were all living; and theyoungest had a wife and children. All will be found connected with ourstory, the second and third prominently. The fourth owed his safety, perhaps, to the influential connections of his wife. 

The first notice we have of Bray Wilkins is in the Massachusettscolonial records, Sept. 6, 1638, when he was authorized to set up ahouse and keep a ferry at Neponset River, and have "a penny a person. "On the 5th of November, 1639, the General Court accepted a reportmade by William Hathorne and Richard Davenport, commissionersappointed for the purpose, and, in accordance therewith, laid out afarm for Richard Bellingham, who had been deputy-governor, was then anassistant, and afterwards governor, "on the head of Salem, to thenorth-west of the town; there being in it a hill, and an Indianplantation, and a pond. " This nice little farm included seven hundredacres, and "about one hundred or one hundred and fifty acres ofmeadow" beside. The next thing we hear about the matter is a petitionto the General Court, May 22, 1661, of "Bray Wilkins and John Gingle, humbly desiring that the farm called by the name of Will's Hill, whichthis Court granted to the worshipful Richard Bellingham, Esq. , andthey purchased of him, may be laid to, and appointed to belong to, Salem; being nigh its lands, and the petitioners of its society. " TheCourt granted the request. It seems that, about a year before, on the9th of March, "Bray Wilkins, husbandman, and John Gingle, tailor, bothof Lynn, " had bought the Bellingham farm for two hundred and fiftypounds, of which they paid at the time twenty-five pounds, andmortgaged it back for the residue. The twenty-five pounds was paid asfollows: twenty-four pounds in a ton of bar-iron, and one pound inmoney. Wilkins had, some time before, removed from Neponset, andperhaps had been working in one of the iron-manufactories then inoperation at Lynn. When the balance of his wages over his expensesenabled him, with the aid of Gingle, to raise a ton of iron and scrapetogether twenty shillings, they entered upon their bold undertaking. He had not a dollar in his pocket; but he had what was better thandollars, --industrious habits, a resolute will, a strong constitution, an iron frame, and six stout sons. After a while, he took into thework, in addition to his own effective family force, two trustykinsmen, Aaron Way and William Ireland, conveying to them good farmsout of his seven hundred acres. He enlarged his farm, from time totime, by new purchases, so as to more than make up for what he sold toWay and Ireland. In 1676 the mortgage was fully discharged. He and hissons bought out the heirs of Gingle, and the work was done. They held, free from debt, in one tract, a territory about two miles in length onthe Reading line. Each member of the family had a house, barns, orchards, gardens, meadows, upland, and woodland; and the homestead ofthe old patriarch was in the midst of them, the enterprise of hislaborious life crowned with complete success. The innumerable familyof the name, scattered all over the country, has largely, if notwholly, been derived from this source. Bray Wilkins, and the membersof his household in all its branches, were always on hand at parishmeetings in Salem Village. Over a distance, as their route must havebeen, of five miles, they came, in all seasons and all weathers, bythe roughest roads, and, in the earlier period, where there were noroads at all, through the woods, fording streams, to meeting on theLord's Day. He continued vigorous, hale, and active to the last; anddied, as he truly characterizes himself in his will, "an ancient, "Jan. 1, 1702, at the age of ninety-two. 

This was the way in which the large grants made to wealthy and eminentpersons, governors, deputy-governors, and assistants, came into thepossession and under the productive labor of a yeomanry who made goodtheir title to the soil by the force of their characters and thestrength of their muscles. One of the terms of Wilkins's purchase was, that, if he found and wrought minerals on the land, he was to pay toBellingham or his heirs a royalty of ten pounds per annum. Believingthat the best mine to be found in land is the crops that can be raisedfrom it, he never tried to find any other. 

Bray Wilkins will appear to have shared in the witchcraft delusion, and been very unhappily connected with it; but he lived to behold itstermination, and to participate in the restoration of reason. Theminister of the parish at the time of his death, the Rev. JosephGreen, kept a diary which has been preserved. He thus speaks of theold man: "He lived to a good old age, and saw his children's children, and their children, and peace upon our little Israel. "

It is rather curious to notice such indications as the mineral clausein Wilkins's deed affords of the prevalent expectation, at thebeginning of settlements in this region, that valuable minerals wouldbe found in it. What makes it worthy of particular inquiry is, thatthey were found and wrought for some time, but that no one thinks oflooking after them now. Simon Bradstreet, Daniel Dennison, and JohnPutnam put up and carried on together, upon a large scale, iron-works, in 1674, at Rowley Village, now Boxford. Samuel and Nathan Leonardwere employed to construct them, and carried them on by contract. These iron-works were long regarded as a promising enterprise andvaluable investment. The Leonards were probably of the same familythat, at Raynham and the neighborhood, engaged in this business to agreat extent, and for a long period, making it a source of wealth andthe foundation of eminent families. We know that the business wascarried on extensively in Lynn, and that Governor Endicott was quitesure that he had found copper on his Orchard Farm. Who knows but thatmodern science and more searching methods of detection may yetdiscover the hidden treasures of which the fathers caught a glimpse, and their enterprises be revived and conducted with permanent energyand success?

In 1669, Joseph Houlton testified, that, when he was about twentyyears of age, in 1641, he was "a servant to Richard Ingersoll, " andworked on his land at Ingersoll's Point. About the year 1652, hemarried Sarah, daughter of Richard Ingersoll, and widow of WilliamHaynes. By her he had five sons and two daughters, who lived tomaturity. He gave to each of them a farm; and their houses were in hisnear neighborhood. The sons were respectable and substantialcitizens, and persons of just views and amiable sentiments. The fatherwas one of the honored heads of the village, and lived to a good oldage. He died May 30, 1705. From him, it is probable, all of the namein this country have sprung. It will be for ever preserved in thepublic annals and on the geographical face of the country. SamuelHoulton, great-grandson of the original Joseph, was a representativeof Massachusetts for ten years in the old Congress of theConfederation, for a time presiding over its deliberations. He wasalso a member of the first Congress under the Constitution, andsubsequently, for a very long period, Judge of Probate for the countyof Essex. He was a true patriot and wise legislator; enjoyed to anextraordinary degree the confidence and love of the people; had acommanding person and a noble and venerable aspect; and was alwaysconspicuous by the dignity and courtesy of his manners. He was aphysician by profession; but his whole life was spent in the publicservice. He was in both branches of the Legislature of the State, alsoin the Executive Council. He was major of the Essex regiment at theopening of the Revolution; was a member of the Committee of Safety, and of every convention for the framing of the Government; and, formore than thirty years, a judge of the Court of Common Pleas. He died, where he was born and had his home for the greater part of his life, in Salem Village, Jan. 2, 1816, in the seventy-eighth year of his age. 

In 1724 a petition was presented to the Legislature, commencing asfollows: "Whereas Salem is a most ancient town of MassachusettsProvince, and very much straitened for land, " the petitioners pray fora grant in the western part of the province. The petition was allowedon condition that one lot be reserved for the first settled minister, one for the ministry, and one for a school. Each grantee was requiredto give a bond of twenty-five pounds to be on the spot; have a houseof seven feet stud and eighteen square at least, seven acres ofEnglish hay ready to be mowed, and help to build a meeting-house andsettle a minister, within five years. A grandson of Joseph Houlton, ofthe same name, led the company that emigrated to the assignedlocation. The first result was the town of New Salem, in FranklinCounty, incorporated in 1753; named in honor of the old town fromwhich their leading founder had come. But the people were notsatisfied with having merely a school. They must have an academy. Theywent to work with a will, and an academy was established andincorporated in 1795. This was the second result. The academy did notflourish to an extent to suit their views, and they beset theLegislature to grant them a township of land in the woods of Maine toenable them to endow it. They carried their point, and in 1797obtained the grant. The effort had been great, and great was therejoicing at its successful issue. But, as bad luck would have it, just at that time land could not be sold at any price. The grantbecame worthless; and deep and bitter was the disappointment of thepeople of New Salem. The doom of the academy seemed to be settled, and its days numbered and finished. But there were men in New Salemwho were determined that the academy should be saved. They met inconsultation, and, under the lead of still another Joseph Houlton, ofthe same descent, fixed their purpose. They sold or mortgaged theirfarms, which more than half a century of labor had renderedproductive, and which every association and every sentiment rendereddear to them. With the money thus raised they bought the grantedtract, paying a good price for it. The preservation and endowment ofthe academy were thus secured; but all benefit from it to themselvesor their descendants was wholly relinquished. It was the only way inwhich the academy could be saved. Some must make the sacrifice, andthey made it. They packed up bag and baggage; sold off all they couldnot carry; gathered their families together; bid farewell to thescenes of their birth and childhood, the homes of their life, and thefruits of their labor; and started in wagons and carts on the journeyto Boston. Their location was hundreds of miles distant, far down inthe eastern wilderness, and inaccessible from the extremes ofsettlement at that time on the Penobscot. As the only alternative, they embarked in a coasting-vessel; went down the Bay of Fundy to St. John, N. B. ; took a river-sloop up to Fredericton, --a hundred miles;got up the river as they could, in barges or canoes, eighty milesfurther to Woodstock; and there, turning to the left, struck into theforest, until they reached their location. The third result of thisemigration, in successive generations and stages, from Salem Farms, isto be seen to-day in a handsome and flourishing village, interspersedand surrounded with well-cultivated fields, --the shire town of thecounty of Aroostook, in the State of Maine; which bears the name ofthe leader of this disinterested, self-sacrificing, and noble company. Three times was it the lot of this one family to encounter and conquerthe difficulties, endure and triumph over the privations, and carrythrough the herculean labors, of subduing a rugged wilderness, andbringing it into the domain of civilization, --at Salem Village, NewSalem, and Houlton. It would be difficult to find, in all our history, a story that more strikingly than this illustrates the elements of theglory and strength of New England, --zeal for education, --enterpriseinvigorated by difficulties, --and prowess equal to all emergencies. 

John Burton came early to Salem by way of Barbadoes. He combined thepursuits of a farmer and a tanner. He was a sturdy old Englishman, who, while probably holding the theological sentiments that prevailedin his day, abhorred the spirit of persecution, and was unwilling tolive where it was allowed to bear sway. He does not appear to havebeen a Quaker, but sympathized with all who suffered wrong. In 1658, he went off in their company to Rhode Island, sharing theirbanishment. But his conscience would not let him rest in voluntaryflight. He came back in 1661, to bear his testimony againstoppression. He was brought before the Court, as an abettor andshelterer of Quakers. He told the justices that they were robbers anddestroyers of the widows and fatherless, that their priests divinedfor money, and that their worship was not the worship of God. Theycommanded him to keep silent. He commanded them to keep silent. Theythought it best to bring the colloquy to a close by ordering him tothe stocks. They finally concluded, upon the whole, to let him alone;and he remained here the rest of his life. His descendants are througha daughter (who married William Osborne) and his son Isaac. They arenumerous, under both names. Isaac was an active and respectablecitizen of the village, and a farmer of enterprise and energy. Hecarried on, under a lease, Governor Endicott's farm of over fivehundred acres on Ipswich River, and had lands of his own. Insubsequent generations, this family branched off in various directionsto Connecticut, Vermont, and elsewhere. One detachment of them went toWilton, N. H. , where the family still remains on the originalhomestead. The late Warren Burton, who was born in Wilton, --a graduateof Harvard College in the class of 1821, and well known for hisinvaluable services in the cause of education, philanthropy, andletters, --was a direct descendant of John Burton, and as true to therights of conscience as the old tanner, who bearded the lion ofpersecution in the day of his utmost wrath, and in his very den. 

Henry Herrick, who, as has been stated, purchased the Cherry-Hill farmof Alford, was the fifth son of Sir William Herrick, of Beau ManorPark, in the parish of Loughborough, in the county of Leicester, England. He came first to Virginia, and then to Salem. He wasaccompanied to America by another emigrant from Loughborough, namedCleaveland. Herrick became a member of the First Church at Salem in1629, and his wife Edith about the same time. Their fifth son, Joseph, baptized Aug. 6, 1645, owned and occupied Cherry Hill in 1692. Hemarried Sarah, daughter of Richard Leach, Feb. 7, 1667. He was a manof great firmness and dignity of character, and, in addition to thecare and management of his large farm, was engaged in foreigncommerce. As he bore the title of Governor, he had probably been atsome time in command of a military post or district, or perhaps of aWest-India colony. His descendants are numerous, and have occupieddistinguished stations, often exhibiting a transmitted military stamp. Joseph Herrick was in the Narragansett fight. It illustrates the stateof things at that time, that this eminent citizen, a large landholder, engaged in prosperous mercantile affairs, and who had been abroad, was, in 1692, when forty-seven years of age, a corporal in the villagecompany. He was the acting constable of the place, and, as such, concerned in the early proceedings connected with the witchcraftprosecutions. For a while he was under the influence of the delusion;but his strong and enlightened mind soon led him out of it. He was oneof the petitioners in behalf of an accused person, when intercession, by any for any, was highly dangerous; and he was a leader in the partythat rose against the fanaticism, and vindicated the characters of itsvictims. He inherited a repugnance to oppression, and sympathy for thepersecuted. His father and mother appear, by a record of Court, tohave been fined "for aiding and comforting an excommunicated person, contrary to order. "

William Nichols, in 1651, bought two hundred acres, which had beengranted to Henry Bartholomew, partly in the village, but mostly beyondthe "six-mile extent, " and consequently set off to Topsfield. He hadseveral other lots of land. He distributed nearly all his real estate, during his lifetime, to his son John; his adopted son, Isaac Burton;his daughters, the wives of Thomas Wilkins and Thomas Cave; and hisgrand-daughter, the wife of Humphrey Case. His only son John hadseveral sons, and from them the name has been widely dispersed. In adeposition dated May 14, 1694, William Nichols declares himself "agedupwards of one hundred years. " As his will was offered for ProbateFeb. 24, 1696, he must have been one hundred and two years of age athis death. 

William Cantlebury was a large landholder, having purchasedthree-quarters of the Corwin grant. He died June 1, 1663. His namedied with him, as he had no male issue. His property went to hisdaughters, who were represented, in 1692, under the names of Small, Sibley, and Buxton. The Flints, Popes, Uptons, Princes, Phillipses, Needhams, and Walcotts, had valuable farms, and appear, from therecords and documents, to have been respectable, energetic, andintelligent people. Daniel Andrew was one of the strong men of thevillage; had been a deputy to the General Court, and acted a prominentpart before and after the witchcraft convulsion. But the great familyof the village--greater in numbers and in aggregate wealth than anyother, and eminently conspicuous on both sides in the witchcraftproceedings--remains to be mentioned. 

John Putnam had a grant of one hundred acres, Jan. 20, 1641. With hiswife Priscilla, he came from Buckinghamshire, England, and wasprobably about fifty years of age on his arrival in this country. Hewas a man of great energy and industry, and acquired a large estate. He died in 1662, leaving three sons, --Thomas, born in 1616; Nathaniel, in 1620; and John, in 1628. For a more convenient classification, Ishall, in speaking of this family, refer, not to the original John atall, but to the sons as its three heads. 

Thomas, the eldest, inherited a double share of his father's lands. Hewas of age when he came to America, and had received a good education. He appears to have settled, in the first instance, in Lynn, where forseveral years he acted as a magistrate, holding local courts, byappointment of the General Court. Upon removing to Salem, he waschosen, as the town-records show, to the office of constable. This wasconsidered at that time as quite a distinguished position, carryingwith it a high authority, covering the whole executive localadministration. Thomas Putnam was the first clerk of Salem Village, and acted prominently in military, ecclesiastical, and municipalaffairs. He seems to have been a person of a quieter temperament thanhis younger brothers, and led a somewhat less stirring life. Possessing a large property by inheritance, he was not quite so activein increasing it; but, enjoying the society and friendship of theleading men, lived a more retired life. At the same time, he wasalways ready to serve the community if called for, as he often was, when occasion arose for the aid of his superior intelligence andpersonal influence. He married first, while in Lynn, Ann, daughter ofEdward Holyoke, great-grandfather of the President of Harvard Collegeof that name whose son, the venerable centenarian, Dr. Edward AugustusHolyoke, is remembered as a true Christian philosopher by thegeneration still lingering on the stage. Having lost his wife on the1st of September, 1665, he married, on the 14th of November, 1666, Mary, widow of Nathaniel Veren; coming, through her, into possessionof property in Jamaica and Barbadoes, in which places Veren hadresided, more or less, in the prosecution of commercial business. Hishomestead, as shown on the map, was occupied by his widow in 1692, and, after her death, by her son Joseph, the father of General IsraelPutnam. He had also a town residence on the north side of EssexStreet, extending back to the North River. Its front on Essex Streetembraced the western part of the grounds now occupied by the NorthChurch, and extended to a point beyond the head of Cambridge Street. He left the eastern half of this property to his son Thomas, and thewestern half to his son Joseph. To his son Edward he left anotherestate in the town, on the western side of St. Peter's Street, to thenorth of Federal Street. 

Thomas Putnam died on the 5th of May, 1686. He left large estates inthe village to each of his children, and a valuable piece of meadowland, of fifteen acres, to a faithful servant. 

Nathaniel Putnam married Elizabeth, daughter of Richard Hutchinson, and, besides what he received from his father, came, through his wife, into possession of seventy-five acres. On that tract he built hishouse and passed his life. The property has remained uninterruptedlyin his family. One of them, the late Judge Samuel Putnam, of theSupreme Court of Massachusetts, enjoyed it as a country residence, andit is still held by his children. Nathaniel Putnam was a deputy to theGeneral Court, and constantly connected with all the interests of thecommunity. He had great business activity and ability, and was aperson of extraordinary powers of mind, of great energy and skill inthe management of affairs, and of singular sagacity, acumen, andquickness of perception. He died July 23, 1700, leaving a numerousfamily and a large estate. 

John Putnam had the same indefatigable activity as Nathaniel. He wasoften deputy to the General Court, and accumulated a very great landedproperty. He married Rebecca Prince, step-daughter of John Gedney, anddied on the 7th of April, 1710. He was buried with military honors. Heleft a large family of sons and daughters. We shall often meet him inour narrative, and gather the materials, as we go along, to form anopinion of his character. The earliest rate-list in the parish recordbook is for 1681. At that time the three brothers were all living; theaggregate sum assessed upon ninety-four names was two hundred pounds. The rate of Thomas was £10. 6_s. _ 3_d. _; that of Nathaniel, £9. 10_s. _; that of John, £8. No other person paid as much as either ofthem. 

These brothers, as well as many others of the large landholders in thevillage, adopted the practice of giving to their sons and sons-in-law, outright, by deed, good farms, as soon as they became heads offamilies; so that, as the fathers advanced in life, their own estateswere gradually diminished; and, when unable any longer to take anactive part in managing their lands, they divided up their wholeremaining real estate, making careful contracts with their childrenfor an adequate maintenance, to the extent of their personal wants andcomfort. Joseph Houlton did this: so did the widow Margery Scruggs, old William Nichols, Francis Nurse, and many others. In his lastyears, John Putnam was on the rate-list for five shillings only, whileall his sons and daughters were assessed severally in large sums. Inthis way they had the satisfaction of making their childrenindependent, and of seeing them take their places among the heads ofthe community. 

Where this practice was followed, there were few quarrels in familiesover the graves of parents, and controversies seldom arose about theprovisions of wills. In some cases no wills were needed to be made. Itis apparent, that, in many respects, this was a wise and goodpractice. It was, moreover, a strictly just one. As the sons weregrowing to an adult age, they added, by their labors, to the value oflands, --inserted a property into them that was truly their own; andtheir title was duly recognized. In a new country, land has but littlevalue in itself; the value is imparted by the labor that clears it andprepares it to yield its products. In 1686, Nathaniel Putnam testifiedthat for more than forty years he had lived in the village, and thatin the early part of that time unimproved land brought only a shillingan acre, while a cow was worth five pounds. In 1672, the rate oftaxation on unimproved land was a half penny per acre, and, for landon which labor had been expended, a penny per acre. In 1685 it wastaxed at the rates of three shillings for a hundred acres of wildland, and one penny an acre for "land within fence. " The relativevalue of improved land constantly increased with the length of time ithad been under culture. It may be said that labor added two-thirds tothe value of land, and that he who by the sweat of his brow addedthose two-thirds, to that extent owned the land. An industrious youngman went out into his father's woods, cut down the trees, cleared theground, fenced it in, and prepared it for cultivation. All that wasthus added to its value was his creation, and he its rightful owner. The right was recognized, and full possession given him, by deed, assoon as he had opened a farm, and built a house, and brought a wifeinto it. 

The effect of this was to anchor a family, from generation togeneration, fast to its ancestral acres. It strengthened the ties thatbound them to their native fields. Its moral effect was beyondcalculation. When a young man was thus enabled to start in life on anindependent footing, it made a man of him while he was young. Itinvested him with the dignity of a citizen by making him feel hisshare of responsibility for the security and welfare of society. Itgave scope for enterprise, and inspiration to industry, at home. Itled to early marriages, under circumstances that justified them. Joseph Putnam, the youngest son of Thomas, at the age of twenty yearsand seven months, took as his bride Elizabeth, daughter of IsraelPorter, and grand-daughter of William Hathorne, when she was sixteenyears and six months old. We shall see what a valuable citizen hebecame; and she was worthy of him. A large and noble family ofchildren grew up to honor them, one of the youngest of whom was IsraelPutnam, of illustrious Revolutionary fame. 

Though there were descendants of this family in every company ofemigrants that went forth from Salem Village, in all directions, inevery generation, to Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Maine, andall parts of the New England, Middle, Western, and Pacific States, there is about as large a proportionate representation of the namewithin the precincts of Salem Village to-day, as there ever was. FiftyPutnams are at present voters in Danvers, on a list of eight hundrednames, --one-sixteenth of the whole number. The rate-schedule of 1712shows almost precisely the same proportion. 

Edward Putnam, whom we shall meet again, was baptized July 4, 1654. After serving as deacon of the church from its organization, a periodof forty years, he resigned on account of advancing age; and in 1733, as he was entering on his eightieth year, gave this account of hisfamily: "From the three brothers proceeded twelve males; from thesetwelve males, forty males; and from these forty males, eighty-twomales: there were none of the name of Putnam in New England but thosefrom this family. " With respect to their situation in life, heremarks: "I can say with the Psalmist, I have been young, and now amold; yet I have not seen the righteous forsaken, nor their seedbegging bread except of God, who provides for all. For God hath givento the generation of my fathers a generous portion, neither povertynor riches. " When the infirmities of age prevented his longerpartaking in the worship of the Lord's Day, this good old manrelinquished his residence near the church, and removed to hisoriginal homestead, in the neighborhood of his children, which hadthen been included in the new town of Middleton. His will is datedMarch 11, 1731. It was offered in Probate, April 11, 1748. Aftermaking every reasonable deduction, in view of his share ofresponsibility for the earlier proceedings in the witchcraftprosecutions, we may participate in the affection and veneration withwhich this amiable and gentle-hearted man was regarded by hiscontemporaries. 

The provisions of his will contain items which so strikinglyillustrate his character, and give us such an insight of the domesticlife of the times, that a few of them will be presented. According tothe prevalent custom, he had given good farms to his several childrenwhen they became heads of families. In his will, he distributes theresidue of his real estate among them with carefulness and an equalhand, describing the metes and bounds of the various tracts with greatminuteness, so as to prevent all questions of controversy among them. He gives legacies in money to his daughters, ten pounds each; and, tohis grand-daughters, five pounds each. To one of his five sons, hegives his "cross-cut saw. " This was used to saw large logs crosswise, having two handles worked by two persons, and distinguished from the"pit saw, " which was used to saw logs lengthwise. All his other toolswere to be divided among his sons, to one of whom he also gives hiscane; to another, his "Great Bible;" to another, "Mr. JeremiahBurroughs's Works;" to another, "Mr. Flavel's Works;" and, to theother, his "girdle and sword. " To one of them he gives his desk, and"that box wherein are so many writings;" to another, his "share in theiron-works;" and to another, his share "in the great timber chain. "This, with other evidence, shows that there was a boom, andarrangements on a large scale for the lumbering business, at thattime, on Ipswich River. The provisions for his wife were veryconsiderate, exact, and minute, so as to prevent all possibility ofthere being any difficulty in reference to her rights, or of her eversuffering want or neglect. He gives to her, absolutely and for her owndisposal, the residue of his books and all his "movable estate" in thehouse and out of it, including all "cattle, sheep, swine, " the wholestock of the homestead farm, agricultural implements, and carriages. He makes it the duty of one of his sons to furnish her with all the"firewood" she may want, with ten bushels of corn-meal, two bushels ofEnglish meal, four bushels of ground malt, four barrels of goodcider, --he to find the barrels--as many apples "as she shall seecause, " and nine or ten score weight of good pork, annually: he was to"keep for her two cows, winter and summer, " and generally to provideall "things needful. " The will specifies, apartment by apartment, fromcellar to garret, one-half of the house, to be for her accommodation, use, and exclusive control, and half of the garden. The sons were topay, in specified proportions, all his funeral charges. One of thesons was to pay her forthwith four pounds in money; and they wereseverally to deliver to her annually, in proportions expresslystated, ten pounds for pocket money. When the relative value of moneyat that time is considered, and the other particulars above namedtaken into account, it will be allowed that he was faithful and wisein caring for the wife of his youth and the companion of his longlife. There is no better criterion of the good sense and good feelingof a person than his last will and testament. The result of a quiteextensive examination is a conviction that the application of thistest to the early inhabitants of Salem Village is most creditable tothem, particularly in the tender but judicious and effectual manner inwhich the rights, comfort, independence, and security of their wiveswere provided for. 

In the third generation, the three Putnam families began to give theirsons to the general service of the country in conspicuous publicstations, and in the professional walks of life. Their names appear onthe page of history and in the catalogues of colleges. Major-GeneralIsrael Putnam was a grandson of the first Thomas. On the 14th of May, 1718, Archelaus, a grandson of John, and son of James, died atCambridge, while an undergraduate. Benjamin, a son of Nathaniel, inhis will, presented for Probate, April 25, 1715, says, "I give my sonDaniel one hundred and fifty pounds for his learning. " Daniel livedand died in the ministry, at North Reading. His name heads the list ofmore than thirty--all, it is probable, of this family--in the lastTriennial Catalogue of Harvard University. 

The brightest name in the annals of Salem Village, though frequentlyreferred to, has not yet been presented for your contemplation. Ishall hold it up and keep it in your view by a somewhat detaileddescription, not only because it is necessary to a full understandingof our subject, but because it is good to gaze upon a life of virtue;to pause while beholding a portrait beaming with beneficence, andradiant with all excellent, beautiful, and attractive affections. 

Nathaniel Ingersoll was about eleven years old at the death of hisfather. His mother married John Knights, of Newbury, who became thehead of her household, and continued to carry on the Townsend Bishopfarm for several years. Governor Endicott, the friend and neighbor ofRichard Ingersoll, took Nathaniel, while still a lad, into his family. In a deposition made in Court, June 24, 1701, Nathaniel Ingersollsays, "I went to live with Governor Endicott as his servant fouryears, on the Orchard Farm. " At that time, the term "servant" had noderogatory sense connected with it. It merely implied the relationsbetween an employer and the employed, without the least tint of thefeeling which we associate with the condition of servility. Here was ayouth, who, by his father's will, was the owner of a valuable estateof seventy-five acres in the immediate neighborhood, voluntarilyseeking the privilege of entering the service of his father's friend, because he thereby would be better qualified, when old enough, toenter upon his own estate. Governor Endicott's political duties werenot then regarded as requiring him to live in Boston; and his usualresidence was at the Orchard Farm, where he was making improvementsand conducting agricultural operations upon so large a scale that itwas the best school of instruction anywhere to be found for a youngperson intending to make that his pursuit in life. Young John Putnam, as has been stated, was there for the same purpose, under similarcircumstances. 

Having built a house and barn, and provided the necessary stock andmaterials, Nathaniel Ingersoll went upon his farm when about nineteenyears of age. Soon after, probably, he married Hannah Collins of Lynn, who, during their long lives, proved a worthy helpmeet. His house wason a larger scale than was usual at that time. One of its rooms isspoken of as very large; and the uses to which his establishment wasput, from time to time, prove that it must have had capaciousapartments. Its site is shown on the map. The road from Salem toAndover passed it, not at an angle as now, but by a curve. The presentparsonage of Danvers Centre stands on the lot. But Ingersoll's housewas a little in the rear of the site occupied by the presentparsonage. It faced south. In front was an open space, or lawn, calledIngersoll's Common. Here he lived nearly seventy years. During thatlong period, his doors were ever open to hospitality and benevolence. His house was the centre of good neighborhood and of all movements forthe public welfare. His latch-string was always out for friend orstranger. In a military sense, and every other sense, it was thehead-quarters of the village. On his land, a few rods to thenorth-east, stood the block-house where watch was kept against Indianattacks. There a sentinel was posted day and night, under hissupervision. The spot was central to the several farming settlements;and all meetings of every kind took place there. To accommodate thepublic, he was licensed to keep a victualling-house; also to sell beerand cider by the quart "on the Lord's Day. " This last provision wasfor the benefit of those who came great distances to meeting, and hadto find refreshment somewhere between the services. To meet theoccasions arising out of this business, he probably had a separatebuilding. Indeed, the evidence, in the language used in reference toit, is quite decisive that there was an "ordinary, " distinct from thedwelling-house. The location was thought to render such anestablishment necessary, and his character secured its orderlymaintenance. 

Travellers through the country stopped at "Nathaniel Ingersoll'scorner. " The earliest path or roadway to and from the easternsettlements went by it. Here Increase and Cotton Mather, and allmagistrates and ministers, were entertained. Here the wants of thepoor and unfortunate were made known, and all men came for counsel andadvice. From the first, even when he had not reached the age ofmaturity, he commanded to a singular extent the confidence and respectof all men. The influence of his bearing and character, thus earlyestablished, was never lost or abated, or disturbed for a momentduring his long life. He was the umpire to settle all differences, butnever made an enemy by his decisions. Although of moderate estate, compared with some of his neighbors, they all treated him with adeference greater than they sometimes paid to each other. It was hislot to be mixed up with innumerable controversies, to be in the verycentre of the most vehement and frightful social convulsions, and toact decisively in some of them; but it is most marvellous to witnesshow uniform and universal was the consideration in which he was held. These statements are justified abundantly by evidence in records anddocuments. 

When village business was to be transacted, or consultation of anykind had, the house of Deacon Ingersoll was designated, as a matter ofcourse, for the place of meeting. Whether it was an ecclesiastical ora military gathering, a prayer-meeting or a train-band drill, it wasthere. Before they had a meeting-house, it cannot be doubted, they metfor worship in his large room. We find it recorded, that, after themeeting-house was built, if from the bitterness of the weather, or anyother cause, it was too uncomfortable to remain in, they would adjournto Deacon Ingersoll's. Such a free use of a particular person'spremises sometimes engenders a familiarity that runs into license, andis apt to breed contempt. Not so at all in his case. There was anative-born dignity, an honest manliness and pervading integrityabout him, that were appreciated by all persons at all times. Whenwrong was meditated, his admonition was received with respectfulconsideration; when it had been committed, his rebuke awakened noresentment. The fact, that he was acknowledged and felt by all to be aperfectly just man, is apparent through the whole course of his actionin all the affairs of life. His uprightness, freedom from unworthyprejudice, and clear and transparent conscientiousness, appear in alldocuments, depositions, and records that proceeded from him. He wasoften called to give evidence in land causes and other trials at law;and his testimony is always straightforward, fair, and lucid. You cantell from the style, temper, or tone of other witnesses, which side ofthe controversy they espoused, but not from his. In the great andprotracted conflict in the courts, relating to the Townsend Bishopfarm, he and all his most intimate connections and relatives wereparties of adverse interest; but Zerubabel Endicott paid homage, andleft it on record, to the truthfulness and uprightness of thetestimony and the fairness of the course of Nathaniel Ingersoll. Weshall meet other illustrations to the same effect in the course of ournarrative. 

Although it is anticipating the course of events, it may be well totrace the outlines of the life of this man to its distant close. Partaking of the general views of his age, he participated in theproceedings that led to the witchcraft prosecutions. He believed inwhat was regarded as decisive evidence against the accused, and actedaccordingly. But no one ever felt that there was any vindictiveness inhis course. 

He lived to see the storm that desolated his beloved village passaway, and to enjoy the restoration of reason, peace, and good-willamong a people who had so long been torn by strife, and subjected tountold horrors, --horrors that have never yet been fully described, andwhich I despair of being able adequately to depict. He did all that agood and true man could do to eradicate the causes of the mischief. Heparticipated in the exercises of a day of Thanksgiving, set apart forthe purpose, in 1700, to express the devout and contrite gratitude ofthe people to a merciful God for deliverance from the errors andpassions that had overwhelmed them with such awful judgments. Theremoval of Mr. Parris having been effected, Joseph Green was settlednear the close of the year 1697. He was a wise and prudent man. Bykind, cautious, and well-timed measures, he gradually succeeded inextracting every root of bitterness, healing all the breaches, andrestoring harmony to a long-distracted people. In this work, DeaconIngersoll and his good associate, Edward Putnam, aided him to theutmost. When, by their united counsels and labors, the difficult workwas about accomplished, Mr. Green was taken to his reward, in 1715. Greatly was he lamented; but Nathaniel Ingersoll had realized all hisbest wishes at last. The prayers he had poured forth for fifty yearshad been answered. He had seen the completed service of a pastor whohad fulfilled his highest estimate of what a Christian ministershould be. He lived to witness and share in the warm and unanimouswelcome of Peter Clark to a useful, honored, happy ministry whichlasted more than half a century. The ordination of Mr. Clark, whichtook place on the 8th of June, 1717, was made the occasion ofdemonstrating the complete re-establishment of social harmony andChristian love throughout that entire community. The storms of strifehad commenced with the settlement of the first minister, more thanforty years before: they had increased in violence, until, at thewitchcraft delusion, they swept in a tornado every thing to ruin. Theclouds had been slowly dispersed, and the angry waves smoothed down, by Mr. Green's benignant ministry. The long, and yet unbroken, "era ofgood feeling" was fully inaugurated. It was a day of great rejoicing. Old men and matrons, young men and maidens, met together in happyunion. Tradition says that they carried their grateful festivities tothe highest point allowable by the proprieties of that period. Havingwitnessed this scene, and beheld the church and village of hisaffections start on a new and sure career of peace and prosperity, theGood Parishioner folded his mantle and departed from sight. He died in1719, in his eighty-fifth year. He was truly the "Man of Ross. " Thecelebrated portrait, which poetry has drawn under this name, was froman actual example in real life, not more shining than his. He left noissue; but his brothers were the founders of a family widelydiffused, many members of which have, in every subsequent age, contributed to the honor of the name. Innumerable branches have spreadout from the same stock under other names. The children of the lateDr. Nathaniel Bowditch, through both father and mother, have descendedfrom a brother of Nathaniel Ingersoll. 

Citations and extracts from documents on file will justify all I havesaid of this man. 

His wife was a spirit kindred to his own. Their only child, adaughter, died when quite young. Their hearts demanded an object onwhich to exercise parental affection, and to give opportunity forbenevolent care, within their own household; and they induced theirneighbor, Joseph Hutchinson, who had several sons, to give one of themto be theirs by adoption. When this child had grown to manhood, a deedwas recorded in the Essex Registry, Oct. 2, 1691, of which this is thepurport:--

 "Benjamin Hutchinson, being an infant when he was given to us by his parents, we have brought him up as our own child; and he, the said Benjamin, living with us as an obedient son, until he came of one and twenty years of age, he then marrying from us, I, the said Nathaniel Ingersoll, and Hannah, my wife, on these considerations, do, upon the marriage of our adopted son, Benjamin Hutchinson, give and bequeath to him, his heirs and assigns for ever, this deed of gift of ten acres of upland, and also three acres of meadow, " &c. 

When Mr. Parris was settled, it occurred to Deacon Ingersoll, that itwould be very convenient for him to have a certain piece of groundbetween the parsonage land and the Andover road; and he gave him adeed, from which the following is an extract. It is dated Jan. 2, 1689. 

 "To all Christian people to whom this present writing shall come, Nathaniel Ingersoll, of Salem Village, in the county of Essex, sendeth greeting. Know ye, that the said Nathaniel Ingersoll, husbandman, and Hannah, his wife, for and in consideration of the love, respect, and honor which they justly bear unto the public worship of the true and only God, and therefore for the encouragement of their well-beloved pastor, the Rev. Samuel Parris, who hath lately taken that office amongst them, and also for and in consideration of a very small sum of money to them in hand paid, with which they do acknowledge themselves fully contented and satisfied, do grant to said Samuel Parris and Elizabeth, his wife, for life, and then to the children of said Samuel and Elizabeth Parris, four and a half acres of land, adjoining upon the home field of the said Nathaniel Ingersoll; the three acres on the south alienated by gift, and the remainder by sale. "

There was a fine young orchard on the land. 

Joseph Houlton had conveyed to the parish a lot for the use of theministry, attached to the parsonage house. A question having arisen inconsequence of a lost deed, or some other imagined defect in theHoulton title, whether the land originally belonged to him or toNathaniel Ingersoll, the latter disposed of it at once by aninstrument recorded in the Essex Registry, of which the following isthe substance:--

 "Nathaniel Ingersoll to the Trustees of Salem Village Ministry land, for divers good causes and considerations me thereunto moving, but more especially for the true love and desire I have to the peace and welfare of Salem Village wherein I dwell, I hereby release, &c. , all my right and title to five acres described in my brother Houlton's deed of sale, " &c. 

In the same Registry, the following extract is found, in a deed datedJan. 28, 1708:--

 "For the desire I have that children may be educated in Salem Village, I freely give four poles square of land to Rev. Joseph Green, to have and to hold the same, not for his own particular use, but for the setting a schoolhouse upon, and the encouragement of a school in this place. "

The Essex Registry has a deed dated Jan. 6, 1714, of which thefollowing is the substance:--

 "For the good affection that I bear unto Deacon Edward Putnam, and the desire that I have of his comfortable attendance upon the public worship of God, I have freely given unto him, the said Deacon Edward Putnam, of Salem aforesaid, for him and his heirs for ever, a piece of land, bounded northerly upon the land of Joseph Green, next to his orchard gate, westerly on the highway, and southerly and easterly on my land. "

Deacon Putnam was, at this time, sixty years of age. His homestead wasat some distance; and it was often difficult for him to get tomeeting. Ingersoll had always enjoyed the convenience of having only afew rods to go to the place of worship; and he desired to have hisbeloved colleague enjoy the same privilege. Besides, he longed to havehim near. The proffer was probably accepted. We find thatchurch-meetings were held at the house of Deacon Putnam, which wouldnot probably so often have been the case, had he remained on his farm;and we know that there were two dwelling-houses, some time afterwards, on the Ingersoll lot. It was a pleasant arrangement: the two deaconsand the minister being thus brought close together, and reaching eachother through Ingersoll's garden and the minister's orchard. Of thepersonal friendship, attachment, and genial affection between the twogood old deacons, the foregoing extract is a pleasing illustration. 

Nathaniel Ingersoll's property was never very large; and, as he hadenjoyed the luxury, all his life long, of benevolence and beneficence, there was no great amount to be left after suitably providing for hiswife. But there was enough to enable him to express the familyaffection to which he was always true, and to give a parting assuranceof his devotion to the church and people of the village. By his will, certain legacies were required to be paid by the residuary legatee andfinal heir within a reasonable time specified in the document. Itbears date July 8, 1709, and was offered for Probate, Feb. 17, 1719. It begins thus:--

 "In the name of God, Amen. I, Nathaniel Ingersoll, of Salem, in the county of Essex, in the Province of Massachutetts [Transcriber's note: so in original] Bay, in New England, being through God's mercy in good health of body and of perfect memory, but not knowing how soon my great change may come, do make this my last will, in manner and form following: First, I give up my soul to God, in and through Jesus Christ my Redeemer, when he shall please to call for it, hoping for a glorious resurrection, in and through his merits; and my body to decent burial, at the discretion of my executors; and, as for the worldly estate God hath been pleased to give me, I dispose of it in the manner following, " &c. 

He gives a small sum of money, varying from thirty shillings to fourpounds, to each and every nephew and niece then living, twenty-two innumber. He provides for an annuity of twenty shillings a year for asister, the only remaining member of his own immediate family, to bepaid into the hands of the daughter who took care of her. Not beingable to leave a large amount to any, he preferred to express his lovefor all. There were two items in the will which may be speciallypreserved from oblivion. 

 "I give to the church in Salem Village the sum of fifty shillings in money, for the more adorning the Lord's Table, to be laid out in some silver cup, at the discretion of the Pastor, Deacons, and my overseers. "--"After my wife's decease, I give to Benjamin (my adopted son) who was very dutiful to me, while he lived with me, and helpful to me since he has gone from me, all the remaining part of my whole estate, both real and personal, --excepting a small parcel of land of about two acres, that lyeth between Mrs. Walcots and George Wyotts by the highway, which I give to the inhabitants of Salem Village, for a training place for ever. "

The bonds required of the executors by the Probate Court were to theamount of two hundred pounds only, showing that his movable orpersonal estate was a very moderate one. There is a feature in thewill, which is, I think, worthy of being mentioned, as evincing theexcellent judgment and practical wisdom of this man. 

 "I give to Hannah, my well-beloved wife, the use and improvement of my whole estate during her natural life: and my will is, that, if my wife should marry again, he that she so marrieth, before she marry, shall give sufficient security to my overseers not to make strip or waste upon any of my estate; and, if he do not become so bound, I give one-half of my whole estate to Benjamin Hutchinson, at the time of my wife's marriage. "

He did not cut her off entirely, as is sometimes attempted to be done, in the event of a second marriage, but secured her and the estateagainst suffering in case she took that step. He adopted an effectualmethod to prevent any one from seeking to marry her for the purpose ofgetting the benefit of her whole income and a comfortableestablishment upon his property without providing for itspreservation; and, if she should be so improvident as to marry againwithout having his conditions complied with, he took care that sheshould not thereby expose to injury or loss more than one-half of hisestate. Ingenuity is much exercised in making wills, particularly inreference to the rights, interests, and security of wives. It isworthy of consideration, whether, all things considered, NathanielIngersoll's plan is not about as skilful and just as any that has beendevised. 

We shall meet this man again in the course of our story. I trust toyour good feeling in vindication of the space I have given to hisbiography; being strongly impressed with a conviction, that you willagree with me, --taking into view the influence he constantly exerted, his steadfast integrity and honor, his personal dignity and publicspirit, --that the life of this citizen of a retired rural community, this plain "husbandman, " is itself a monument to his memory more trulyglorious than many which have been reared to perpetuate the names ofmen whom the world has called great. The "training place" has beencarefully preserved. Occupying a central point, by the side of theprincipal street, this pretty lawn is a fitting memorial of the Fatherof the village. In its proper character, as a training-field, it isinvested with an interest not elsewhere surpassed, if equalled. Withinits enclosure the elements of the military art have been imparted to agreater number of persons distinguished in their day, and who haveleft an imperishable glory behind them as the defenders of thecountry, a brave yeomanry in arms, than on any other spot. It wasprobably used as a training field at the first settlement of thevillage. From the slaughter of Bloody Brook, the storming of theNarragansett Fort, and all the early Indian wars; from the Heights ofAbraham, Lake George, Lexington, Bunker Hill, Brandywine, Pea Ridge, and a hundred other battle-fields, a lustre is reflected back uponthis village parade-ground. It is associated with all the militarytraditions of the country, down to the late Rebellion. Lothrop, Davenport, Gardners, Dodges, Raymonds, Putnams, Porters, Hutchinsons, Herricks, Flints, and others, who here taught or learned the manualand drill, are names inscribed on the rolls of history for deeds ofheroism and prowess. 

There was the usual diversity and variety of character among thepeople of the village. John Procter originally lived in Ipswich, wherehe, as well as his father before him, had a farm of considerablevalue. In 1666, or about that time, he removed to Salem, and carriedon the Downing farm, which had before been leased to the Flints. Aftera while, Procter purchased a part of it. If a conclusion can be drawnfrom the prevalent type of his posterity of our day, he was a man ofherculean frame. There is, I think, a tradition to this effect. At anyrate, his character was of that stamp. He had great native force andenergy. He was bold in his spirit and in his language, --an uprightman, no doubt, as the whole tone of the memorials of him indicate, butfree and imprudent in speech, impulsive in feeling, and sometimes rashin action. He was liable from this cause, as we shall see, to get intocontention and give offence. There was Jeremiah Watts, arepresentative of a class of men existing in every community where theintellect is stimulated and idiosyncrasies allowed to developthemselves. By occupation he was a dish-turner, but by temperament anenthusiast, a zealot, and an agitator. He was not satisfied withthings as they were, nor willing to give time an opportunity toimprove them. He took hold of the horns of the altar with daringhands. He denounced the Church and the world, --undertook to overturnevery thing, and to put all on a new foundation. He entered on acrusade against what he called "pulpit preaching, " whereby particularpersons, called ministers, "may deliver what they please, and nonemust object; and this we must pay largely for; our bread must be takenout of our mouths, to maintain the beast's mark; and be whollydeprived of our Christian privileges. This is the time of Antichrist'sreign, and he must reign this time: now are the witnesses slain, andthe leaders in churches are these slayers. But I see plainly that itis a vain thing to debate about these things with our fellow-brethren;for they are all for lording it, and trampling under foot. " This manimagined that he "was singled out alone to give his testimony forChrist, discovering Antichrist's marks. " "If any, " he cried out, "willbe faithful for Christ, they must witness against Antichrist, which isself-love, and lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God. Thewitnesses are now slain, but shortly they will rise again, " &c. Hetried to get up "private Christian meetings, " to run an opposition to"pulpit preaching. " After going about from house to house, declaimingin this style, denouncing all who would not fall in with his notionsand act with him, and not succeeding in overthrowing things ingeneral, he hit upon a new expedient. As his neighbors had wit enoughto let him alone, and did not suffer themselves to be tempted toresort to the civil power to make him keep quiet, he did it himself. He instituted proceedings against the ministers and churches, on thecharge, that, by taking the rule into their own hands, they weresupplanting the magistrates and usurping the civil power. This was notin itself a bad move; but the Court wisely declined to engage in theproceedings. They neither prosecuted the case nor him, but let thewhole go by. They adhered severely to the do-nothing policy. What aworld of mischief would have been avoided, if all courts, everywhere, at all times, had shown an equal wisdom! Watts was allowed to vex thevillage, torment the minister, and perplex those who listened to himby the ingenuity and ability with which he urged his views. Hecontinued his brawling declamations until he was tired; but, not beingnoticed by ministers or magistrates, no great harm was done, and heprobably subsided into a quiet and respectable citizen. 

The prominent place Giles Corey is to occupy in the scene before usrenders an account of him particularly necessary. It is not easy todescribe him. He was a very singular person. His manner of life andgeneral bearing and conversation were so disregardful, in manyparticulars, of the conventional proprieties of his day, that it isnot safe to receive implicitly the statements made by hiscontemporaries. By his peculiarities of some sort, he got a bad name. In the Book of Records of the First Church in Salem, where his publicprofession of religion is recorded, he is spoken of as a man of eightyyears of age, and of a "scandalous life, " but who made a confession ofhis sins satisfactory to that body. It cannot be denied that he wasregarded in this light by some; but there is no reason to believe, that, in referring to the sinfulness of his past life, the old manmeant more than was usually understood by such language on suchoccasions. He was often charged with criminal acts; but in everyinstance the charge was proved to be either wholly unfounded orgreatly exaggerated. He had a good many contentions and roughpassages; but they were the natural consequences, when a bold andstrong man was put upon the defensive, or drawn to the offensive, bythe habit of inconsiderate aspersion into which some of his neighborshad been led, and the bad repute put upon him by scandal-mongers. Hewas evidently an industrious, hard-working man. He was a person ofsome means, a holder of considerable property in lands and otherforms. Deeds are often found on record from and to him. He ownedmeadows near Ipswich River. His homestead, during the last thirtyyears of his life, was a farm of more than a hundred acres of veryvaluable land, which has been in the possession of the family, nowowning it, for a hundred years. The present proprietor, Mr. BenjaminTaylor, some twenty years ago, ploughed up the site of Corey'sdwelling-house; the vestiges of the cellar being then quite visible. It was near the crossing of the Salem and Lowell, and Georgetown andBoston Railroads, about three hundred feet to the west of thecrossing, and close to the track of the former road, on its southside. The spot is surrounded by beautiful fields; and their aspectshows that it must have been, in all respects, an eligible estate. What is now known as "the Curtis Field" is a part of Corey's farm. 

Giles Corey lived previously, for some time, in the town of Salem. Hesold his house there in 1659. The contract with a carpenter forbuilding his farmhouse is preserved. It was stipulated to be erected"where he shall appoint. " While the carpenter was getting out thematerials, he selected and bought the farm, on which he lived everafterwards. The house was to be "twenty feet in length, fifteen inbreadth, and eight feet stud. " Nothing strikes us more, as strange andunaccountable, than the small size of houses in those days. One wouldhave thought, that, where wood was so plenty and near at hand, andland of no account, they would have built larger houses. In a letter, dated Nov. 16, 1646, from Governor Winthrop to his son John, ofConnecticut, he gives an account "of a tempest (than which I neverobserved a greater);" and mentions that the roof of "Lady Moody'shouse, at Salem, " with all of the chimney above it, was blown off intwo parts, and "carried six or eight rods. Ten persons lay under it, and knew not of it till they arose in the morning. " The house had aflat roof, was of one story, and nine feet in height! Lady DeborahMoody was a person of high position, a connection of Sir Henry Vane, and a woman of property. She bought Mr. Humphreys' great plantation. But, like Townsend Bishop, she was dealt with, and compelled to quitthe colony, on account of her doubts about infant baptism. Winthropcalls her a "wise and anciently religious woman. " She went to LongIsland, where her influence was so important, that Governor Stuyvesantconsulted her in his administration, and conceded to her thenomination of magistrates. It seems very strange that such a ladyshould have had a house only nine feet high. The early houses werebuilt either as temporary structures or with a view to enlargement. Perhaps Lady Moody intended to add a story to hers. They werelow-studded for warmth. The farm-houses generally were designed to beincreased in length, when convenience required. The chimney was verylarge, placed at one end, and so constructed, that, on the extensionof the building, fire-places could be opened into it on the new end. Abuilding of twenty feet was prepared to become one of forty feet inwidth or length, as the case might be; and then the chimney would bein the middle of it. 

As has been intimated, Corey was in bad repute. Either he was alawless man, or much misunderstood. I am inclined to the latteropinion. He belonged to that class of persons, instances of which weoccasionally meet, who care little about the opinions or the talk ofothers. On one occasion, he was going into town with a cartload ofwood. He met Anthony Needham, in company with John Procter whosehouse he had just passed. Procter accosted him thus: "How now, Giles, wilt thou never leave thy old trade? Thou hast got some of my woodhere upon thy cart. " Corey answered, "True, I did take two or threesticks to lay behind the cart to ease the oxen, because they bore toohard. " This shows the free way in which Procter bantered with Corey, and the slight account the latter made of it. But the thing beforelong got to be too serious to be trifled with. It became the fashionto charge all sorts of offences against Corey; and, whatever any onelost or mislaid, he was considered as having abstracted it. The gossipagainst him was quite unrestrained, and created a bitter and angryfeeling in the neighborhood. In the winter of 1676, a man namedGoodell, who had been working on Corey's farm, was carried home to hisfriends by Corey's wife, in a feeble state of health, and died soonafter. It was whispered about, and before long openly asserted, thathe had come to his death in consequence of having been violentlybeaten by Corey, who was accordingly arrested and brought to trial forkilling the man. There was a great excitement against him. He probablyhad punished the man severely for some alleged misconduct; and it wascharged that the castigation had been so unmerciful and excessive asto have broken down his constitution and caused his death. There wasconflicting evidence going to show that the man had been beaten, forsome misconduct, after he had returned to his family. It was acircumstance in favor of Corey, that his wife had taken the invalidto his home; and there was no evidence of any ill feeling between herand the sick man during a stop they made at Procter's house on theirway. The death, too, it was supposed by some, might have resulted fromordinary disease, and not from whipping, either at Corey's or at home. The result was, that, notwithstanding the prejudice against Corey, hewas discharged on paying a fine; showing that the Court did notconsider it a very serious offence. We shall hear of this affairagain. 

In the year 1678, there was a suit at law between Corey and a mannamed John Gloyd, a laborer on his farm, on a question of wages. Thecase was, by agreement of the parties, passed out of court into thehands of arbitrators mutually chosen. John Procter was one of thearbitrators, and, as it would seem, chosen as the friend of Gloyd:Nathaniel Putnam and Edmund Bridges were the others; one of themchosen by Corey, and the other mutually agreed upon. They brought intheir award. Its precise character is not stated; but thecircumstances indicate that it was favorable to Gloyd. The conduct ofCorey on this occasion shows, that, though a rough man perhaps, andliable, from his peculiar ways, to be harshly spoken of, he had, afterall, a generous, forgiving, and genial nature. Nathaniel Putnam andEdmund Bridges state, that, when they brought in their award, "it wasgreatly to the satisfaction of the parties concerned; and Giles Coreydid manifest as much satisfaction, and gave as many thanks to everyone of us, as ever we heard; and Goodman Corey did manifest, to ourobservation, as much satisfaction to John Procter as he did to therest of the arbitrators. " Captain Moore, being by when the award wasbrought in, says, "I did see and take notice of the abundance of lovemanifested from Corey to Procter, and from Procter to Corey: for theydrank wine together; and Procter paid for part, and Corey for part. "

This remarkable overflow of affection between these two men isrendered interesting, not merely by the collisions into which, beforeand after, their impulsive and imprudent natures brought them, but bythe part they were destined to enact in an impending tragedy, whichwas to bring them to a fearful end in a manner and on a scene thatwill arrest the notice of all ages, and attest to their strongcharacters and heroic spirit. The passage has a unique interest, andis worthy of a painter. 

It happened unfortunately, that, a few days after the loving embracesof these hardy men, Procter's house took fire. According to theirhabit, some of the neighbors at once started the idea, that Corey hadset fire to it because of the award of the arbitrators, of whomProcter was one. Under the excitement of the conflagration, with hisusual rashness, and forgetting the pledges of reconciliation that hadjust passed between them, Procter fell in with the accusation, andCorey was brought to trial. It appeared, in evidence, that John Phelpsand Thomas Fuller, who lived on the western borders of the village, near Ipswich River, coming along the road towards Procter's Cornerabout two hours before daylight, on the way probably to Salem market, saw his roof on fire, gave the alarm, and stopped to help put it out. Thomas Gould and Thomas Flint thought it must be the work of anincendiary, or of "an evil hand, " as they expressed it, from the placewhere it took and the hour when it occurred. On the other hand, it wastestified by James Poland and Caleb and Jane Moore, that they heardJohn Procter say that his boy carried a lamp and set the fire byaccident. This was said by him, probably before the idea of Corey'sagency in the matter had been put into his head. The prisoner provedan _alibi_ by the most conclusive evidence, which is so curious, asgiving an insight of a farmer's life at that time, and of Corey'sdomestic condition, that it may well be inserted. 

Abraham Walcot testifies, that, "Tuesday night last was a week, Ilodged at Giles Corey's house, which night John Procter's house wasdamaged by fire; and Giles Corey went to bed before nine o'clock, androse about sunrise again, and could not have gone out of the house butI should have heard him; and it must have been impossible that heshould have gone to Procter's house that night; for he cannot in along time go afoot, and, for his horse-kind, they were all in thewoods. And further testifieth, that said Corey came home very wearyfrom work, and went to bed the rather. " His wife testified that he wasin bed from nine o'clock until sunrise. 

John Parker, one of Corey's four sons-in-law, testified as follows: "Ibeing at work with my father, Goodman Corey, the day Goodman Procter'shouse was on fire. I going home with my father the night before, hecomplained that he was very weary, and said he would go to bed. I did, on our way going, ask him whether or no he would eat his supper: myfather answered me again, no, he could not eat any thing that night;and so went to bed, and so I left him abed. And, the next morning, myfather came to me about sun-rising, and asked me to go with AbrahamWalcot to fetch a load of hay; and my father said he would try whetheror not he could cart up a load of peas. I do also testify that he hadno horse-kind near at home at that time. "

John Gloyd, the hired man, with whom he had the lawsuit that had beensettled a day or two before by arbitrators, testified, incorroboration of Parker, and to show that the latter could not havehad any thing to do with the fire, that he slept in the same room withsaid Parker that night, and that he came to bed between nine and teno'clock in the evening, and never rose until the break of day. Gloyd'swife testified to the same effect. There turned out to be no evidenceagainst Corey whatever, but abundant proof of his innocence. Thehard-working, "weary" old man was triumphantly acquitted. He thought, however, from this high-handed and utterly groundless attempt to wrongand ruin him, and from calumnious general statements that had beenmade against him in the course of the trial, that it was time to puta stop to the malignant and mischievous slanders which had beencurrent in the neighborhood. He instituted prosecutions of Procter andothers for defamation, and recovered against them all. After this, wehear no more of him until he experienced religion and was receivedinto the First Church. Whether he and Procter became reconciled againis not known. Probably they did; for they seem to have had points ofattraction, and each of them traits of kind-heartedness andgenerosity, under a rather rough exterior. The manner in which theybore themselves in their last hours is a matter of history, and stampsthem both with true manliness. 

The incidents which have now been related, and the peculiar traits ofthis man, are perhaps sufficient to account for the fact, that he wasspoken of as a person of "a scandalous" life. He had afforded food forscandal; and it is not surprising, that, in a rural community, wherebut few topics for talk occur beyond the village boundaries, allshould have participated, more or less, in criticising his ways, andthat the various difficulties into which he had been drawn, and thecharges against him, should have made him the object of muchprejudice. His wife Martha was also a noticeable character. She was aprofessor of religion, a member of the village church, and found herchief happiness in attendance upon public worship and in privatedevotions. Much of her time--indeed, all that she could rescue fromthe labors of the household--was spent in prayer. She was a woman ofspirit and pluck, as we shall see. 

Another notability of the village was Bridget Bishop. In 1666--thenthe widow Wasselbe--she was married to Thomas Oliver. After his death, she became the wife of Edward Bishop, who is spoken of as a "sawyer. "This term did not describe the same occupation then to which it isalmost wholly applied now. Firewood, in those days, was not, as ageneral thing, sawed, but chopped. The sawyer got out boards andjoists, beams, and timber of all kinds, from logs; and before millswere constructed, or where they were not conveniently accessible, itwas an indispensable employment, and held a high rank among thedepartments of useful industry. It was in constant requisition inshipyards. It was a manly form of labor, requiring a considerableoutlay of apparatus, and developing finely the whole muscularorganization. The implement employed, beside the ordinary tools, suchas wedges, beetles, the broad-axe, chains, and crowbar, was a strongsteel cutting-plate, of great breadth, with large teeth, highlypolished and thoroughly wrought, some eight or ten feet in length, with a double handle, crossing the plate at each end at a right angle. It was worked by two men, and called a "pit-saw, " because sometimesthe man at the lower handle stood in a deep pit, dug for the purpose, and called a "saw-pit. " But, among the early settlers, the usualmethod was to make a frame of strong timbers. The log to be sawed wasraised by slings, or slid up an inclined plane, and placed uponcross-beams. Above it, a scaffolding was made on which one man stood;the other stood on the ground below. They each held the saw by bothhands, and worked in unison. The log was pushed along by handspikes asthey reached the cross-timbers, and wedges were used to keep the cleftopen, that the saw might work free. So important was this businessconsidered, that, from time to time, the General Court regulated bylaw the rates of pay to the sawyer. If a farmer had suitablewoodlands, he provided in many cases a saw-frame or saw-pit of hisown, got out his logs, and worked them into boards or square timberfor sale. This was a profitable business. 

Edward Bishop had resided, for some seven years previous to thewitchcraft delusion, within the limits of Salem, near the Beverlyline. His wife Bridget was a singular character, not easily described. She kept a house of refreshment for travellers, and a shovel-board forthe entertainment of her guests, and generally seems to havecountenanced amusements and gayeties to an extent that exposed her tosome scandal. She is described as wearing "a black cap and a blackhat, and a red paragon bodice, " bordered and looped with differentcolors. This would appear to have been rather a showy costume for thetimes. Her freedom from the austerity of Puritan manners, anddisregard of conventional decorum in her conversation and conduct, brought her into disrepute; and the tongue of gossip was generallyloosened against her. She was charged with witchcraft, and actuallybrought to trial on the charge, in 1680, but was acquitted; thepopular mind not being quite ripe for such proceedings as took placetwelve years afterwards. She still continued to brave publicsentiment, lived on in the same free and easy style, paying no regardto the scowls of the sanctimonious or the foolish tittle-tattle of thesuperstitious. She kept her house of entertainment, shovel-board, andother appurtenances. Sometimes, however, she resented the calumniescirculated about her being a witch, in a manner that made it to befelt that it was best to let her alone. A man called one day at thehouse of Samuel Shattuck, where there was a sick child. He was astranger to the inmates of the family, and evidently had come to theplace to make trouble for Bridget Bishop. He pretended great pity forthe child, and said, among other things, in an oracular way, "We areall born, some to one thing, and some to another. " The mother askedhim what he thought her poor, suffering child was born to. He replied, "He is born to be bewitched, and is bewitched: you have a neighbor, that lives not far off, who is a witch. " The good woman does notappear to have entertained any suspicion of the kind; but the maninsisted on the truth of what he had affirmed. He succeeded inexciting her feelings on the subject, and, by vague insinuations andgeneral descriptions of the witch, led her mind to fix upon BridgetBishop. He said he should go and see her, and that he could bring herout as the afflicter of her child. She consented to let another ofher boys go with him, and show the way. They proceeded to the house, and knocked at the door. Bridget opened it, and asked what he wouldhave: he said a pot of cider. There was something in the manner of theman which satisfied her that he had come with mischievous intent. Sheordered him off, seized a spade that happened to be near, drove himout of her porch, and chased him from her premises. When he and theboy got back, they bore marks of the bad luck of the adventure. Suchthings had perhaps happened before, and it was found that whoeverprovoked her resentment was very likely to come off second best fromthe encounter; yet Bridget was a member of Mr. Hale's Church inBeverly, and retained her standing in full fellowship there. It musthave been thought, by the pastor and members of that church, that nocharge seriously affecting her moral or Christian character was justlyimputable to her. 

The traveller of to-day, in passing over Crane-river Bridge, approaching the present village of "The Plains, " near the eastern endof the Townsend Bishop or Nurse farm, will notice a roadway by theside of the bridge descending through the brook and going up to rejointhe main road on the other side. Such turnouts are frequent by theside of bridges over small streams. They are refreshing and useful, cooling the feet and cleansing the fetlocks of horses, and washing thewheels of carriages. One afternoon, Edward Bishop, with his wifebehind him on a pillion, was riding home from Salem. Two women, mounted in the same way, joined them; and they chatted togetherpleasantly as their horses ambled along. When they came to the bridge, Bishop, probably merely for the fun of the thing, dashed down into thebrook, instead of going over the bridge, to the great consternationand against the vehement remonstrances of his wife, who berated himsoundly for his reckless disregard of her safety. They got throughwithout accident; and the four jogged on together until the Bishopsturned up to their house, and the other two kept on to their home inBeverly. But all the way from the bridge, until they parted company, Bishop was finding great fault with his wife, saying that he shouldnot have been sorry if any mishap had occurred. She did not say muchafter her first fright and resentment were over; but he kept ontalking very freely about her, and using some pretty hard language. This affair, which perhaps is not without a parallel in the occasionalexperiences of married life, was, with other things of an equallytrivial and irrelevant character, brought to bear fatally against herat her trial on the charge of witchcraft, between seven and eightyears afterward. 

I can find no evidence against the moral character of this woman. Oneperson, at least, who participated largely in getting up accusationsagainst her, acknowledged, in a death-bed repentance, the wrong shehad done. Mr. Hale, the minister of the Beverly congregation, states, in a deposition, that a certain woman, "being in full communion in ourchurch, came to me to desire that Goodwife Bishop, her neighbor, wifeof Edward Bishop, Jr. , might not be permitted to receive the Lord'sSupper in our church till she had given her satisfaction for someoffences that were against her; namely, because the said Bishop didentertain people in her house at unseasonable hours in the night, tokeep drinking and playing at shovel-board, whereby discord did arisein other families, and young people were in danger to be corrupted;that she knew these things, and had once gone into the house, and, finding some at shovel-board, had taken the pieces they played withand thrown them into the fire, and had reproved the said Bishop forpromoting such disorders, but received no satisfaction from her aboutit. " According to Mr. Hale's statement, the night after this complaintwas brought to him, the woman was found to be distracted. "Shecontinuing some time distracted, we sought the Lord by fasting andprayer. " After a while, the woman recovered her senses, and, as Mr. Hale says he understood, expressed a suspicion "that she had beenbewitched by Bishop's wife. " He declares that he did not, at the time, countenance the idea, "hoping better of Goody Bishop. " He saysfurther, that he "inquired of Margaret King, who kept at or near thehouse, " what she had observed concerning the woman who had beendistracted. "She told me that she was much given to reading andsearching the prophecies of Scripture. " At length the woman appearedto have entirely recovered, went to Goody Bishop, gave satisfactionfor what she had said and done against her, and they became friendsagain. Mr. Hale goes on to say, "I was oft praying with andcounselling of her before her death. " She earnestly desired that"Edward Bishop might be sent for, that she might make friends withhim. I asked her if she had wronged Edward Bishop. She said, not thatshe knew of, unless it were in taking his shovel-board pieces, whenpeople were at play with them, and throwing them into the fire; and, if she did evil in it, she was very sorry for it, and desired he wouldbe friends with her, or forgive her. This was the very day before shedied. " That night her distemper returned, and, in a paroxysm ofinsanity, she destroyed herself. 

It is evident, from his own account, that Mr. Hale did not then fallin with, or countenance at all, any unfavorable impressions againstBridget Bishop; and that the poor diseased woman, when entirely freefrom her malady, repented bitterly of what she had done and said ofGoodman Bishop and his wife, and heartily desired their forgiveness. So far as the facts stated by Mr. Hale of his own knowledge go, theyprove that Bridget Bishop was the victim of gross misrepresentation. Five years afterwards, as we shall see, Mr. Hale gave a very differentversion of the affair, and one which it is extremely difficult toreconcile with his own former deliberate convictions at the time whenthe circumstances occurred. 

As it is my object to bring before you every thing that may help toexplain the particular occurrences embraced in the account I am togive of the witchcraft prosecutions, two other persons must bementioned before concluding this branch of my subject, --George Jacobs, Sr. , and his son George Jacobs, Jr. They each had given offence tosome persons, and suffered that sort of notoriety which led to theselection of victims, although both were persons of respectability. The father owned and had lived for about a half-century on a farm inNorth Fields, on the banks of Endicott River, a little to the eastwardof the bridge at the iron-foundery. He was a person of good estate andan estimable man; but it was his misfortune to have an impulsivenature and quick passions. In June, 1677, he was prosecuted and finedfor striking a man who had incensed him. George Jacobs, Jr. , his onlyson, at a court held Nov. 7, 1674, was prosecuted, "found blamable, and ordered to pay costs of court. " His offence and defence areembraced in his deposition on the occasion. 

 "GEORGE JACOBS'S ANSWER TO NATHANIEL PUTNAM'S COMPLAINT. --That I did follow some horses in our enclosure on the Royal Side, where they were trespassing upon us; that the end of my following them was to take them; but, rather than they would be taken, they took the water, and I did follow them no further; but straightway they turned ashore, and I did run to take them as they came out of the water, but could not: and I can truly take my oath that since that time I did never follow any horses or mares; and I hope my own oath will clear me. "

The result of his attempt to drive off the horses was, that severalvaluable animals were drowned. Their owner, Nathaniel Putnam, broughtan action; but he could not recover damages. The horses were evidentlytrespassing, and the Court did not seem to regard Jacobs's conduct asa heinous matter. It is not to be supposed, that Nathaniel Putnamharbored sentiments of revenge or resentment for eighteen years, orhad any hand in prosecuting Jacobs in 1692. There is every indicationthat he did not sympathize in the violent passions which raged on thatoccasion, although he was much under the power of the delusion. Butthe affair of drowning the horses was probably for a long time a topicof gossip, and may have given to the author of the catastrophe anotoriety which nearly cost him his life. 

The account that has been given of the elements of the population ofthe Salem Farms or Village, shows that, while there were the usualvarieties entering into the composition of all communities, it iswholly inadmissible to suppose that the witchcraft delusion took placethere because it was the scene of greater ignorance or stupidity orbarbarism than prevailed elsewhere. This will be made more apparentstill by some general views of the state of society and manners. Thepeople of a remote age are in general only regarded as they are seenthrough prominent occurrences and public movements. These constitutethe ordinary materials of history. Dynasties, reigns of kings, armies, legislative proceedings, large ecclesiastical synods, dogmatic creeds, and the like, are, as a general thing, about all we know of the past. Portraits of individuals appear here and there; but, separated fromthe ordinary life of the times, they cannot be fairly or fullyappreciated. The public life of the past is but the outline, or, morestrictly speaking, the mere skeleton, of humanity. To fill up theoutline, to clothe the skeleton with elastic nerves and warm flesh, and quicken it with a vital circulation, we must get at the domestic, social, familiar, and ordinary experience of individuals and privatepersons; we must obtain a view of the popular customs and the dailyroutine of life. In this way only can history fulfil its office inmaking the past present. 

The people of the early colonial settlements had a private andinterior life, as much as we have now, and the people of all ages andcountries have had. It is common to regard them in no other light thanas a severe, sombre, and pleasure-abhorring generation. It was not sowith them altogether. They had the same nature that we have. It wasnot all gloom and severity. They had their recreations, amusements, gayeties, and frolics. Youth was as buoyant with hope and gladness, love as warm and tender, mirth as natural to innocence, wit assprightly, then as now. There was as much poetry and romance: themerry laugh enlivened the newly opened fields, and rang through thebordering woods as loud, jocund, and unrestrained as in these olderand more crowded settlements. It is true that their theology wasaustere, and their polity, in Church and State, stern; but, in theirmodes of life, there were some features which gave peculiaropportunity to exercise and gratify a love of social excitement of apleasurable kind. Let me mention some of the customs having a tendencyin this direction, that prevailed in the early settlements of NewEngland. 

Whenever a young man had made his clearing in the forest, got out theframe of his house, and selected a helpmeet to dwell with him in it, there was "a raising. " On an appointed day, the neighbors far and nearassembled; all together put their shoulders to the work; and, beforethe shadows of night enveloped the scene, the house was up, andcovered from sill to ridgepole. The same was done if the house of aneighbor had been destroyed by fire. In this case, often the timbers, joists, and boards were contributed as well as the labor. These weremade the occasions of general merriment, in which all ages and bothsexes participated. Then there were the "huskings. " After the barnswere filled with hay and grain, and the corn was ripe, at "harvesthome, " gatherings would be seen on the bright autumnal afternoons ofsuccessive days, in the neighborhood of the different farmhouses. Thesheaves would be taken from the shocks and brought up from the fields, the golden leaves and milky tassels stripped from the full ear, andthe crib filled to the brim. These were scenes of unalloyed enjoymentand unrestrained gayety. 

At that time were prevalent, in rural neighborhoods, other recreationspromotive of social hilarity to the highest degree. As a wintryevening drew on, the wide, deep fireplace--equalling in width nearlythe whole of one side of the room, and so deep that benches werepermanently attached to the jambs, on which two or more couldcomfortably sit--was duly prepared. A huge log, of a diameter equal tothat of "the mast of some great admiral, " six feet perhaps in length, was worked in by handspikes to its place as the "back-log;" a smallerone, as "back-stick, " placed over it; the great andirons dulyadjusted, and the wood piled on artistically--for there was an art inbuilding a wood-fire. The kindlings were placed on top of the whole;never by an experienced hand below. More than the light of day, fromdazzling chandeliers or the magic tongues of flaming gas-burners, blazes through the halls of modern luxury and splendor; but the lightsand shadows from a glowing, old-fashioned, New-England countryfireplace created a scene as enlivening, exhilarating, and genial ashas ever been witnessed, and cannot be surpassed. Assembled neighborsin a single evening accomplished what would have been the work of afamily for months. The corn and the nuts were all shelled; the youngbirch was stripped down in thin strands, and brooms enough made for ayear's service in house and barn; and various other useful officesrendered. The sound of busy hands and nimble fingers was lost incommingling happy voices. Fun and jest, joy and love, ruled the hour. The whole affair was followed by "Blind-man's Buff" or some othersport. After the "old folks" had considerately retired, who knows butthat the sons and daughters of Puritans sometimes wound up with adance? There were sleigh-rides, and the woods rang with the happylaugh and jingling bells. The vehicles used on these occasions were, prior to 1700, more properly called "sleds. " Our modern "sleigh" hadnot then been introduced. As the spring came on, logs would behollowed or scooped out and placed near the feet of sugar maples, aslanting incision made a foot or two above them in the trunks of thetrees, a slip of shingle inserted, and the delicious sap would trickledown into the troughs. When the proper time came, tents or booths madeof evergreen boughs would be erected in the woods, great kettles hungover blazing fires, and a whole neighborhood camp out for several daysand nights, until the work was accomplished, and the flavory syrup orsolid cakes of sugar brought out. 

These were some of the recreations of the country people in the earlysettlements of New England; continuing, perhaps, in frontier towns tothis day. They constituted forms of enjoyment which cannot exist incities or older communities; and possessed a charm, in the memory ofall who ever participated in them, greater, far greater, than societyin any later stage can possess. 

The principal method of travelling in those days was on horseback. Itafforded many special opportunities for social enjoyment. Women aswell as men were trained to it. The people of the village were all athome in the saddle. The daughters of Joseph Putnam, sisters of Israel, were celebrated as equestrians. Tradition relates adventurous feats oftheirs in this line, equal to that which constitutes a part of thehistory of their famous brother. There were, perhaps, several games ofskill or chance practised more or less, even in those days, in thisneighborhood. The only one that seems to have been openly allowed, ofwhich we have any evidence, was shovel-board. This game, now supposedto be out of use, is referred to by Shakespeare, and was quite commonin England as well as in this country. A board about two and a halffeet wide and twenty feet long was placed three feet above the floor, somewhat like a billiard-table, though not with so wide a surface, precisely level and perfectly smooth, covered with a sprinkling offine sand. It was provided with weights or balls, called "pieces, "flattened on one end. The game consisted in shoving them as far aspossible, without going over the end. A trough surrounded the table tocatch the pieces if they fell. Richard Grant White, from whom thisaccount of the game has been derived, says that "it required greataccuracy of eye, and steadiness of hand, much more than ten-pins. " Hestates that, when a boy, he saw it played by "brawny" men, inBrooklyn, N. Y. , and that the pieces then used were of brass. It isprobable that the "pieces" used on Bridget Bishop's shovel-board weremade of some heavy wood, as they were thrown into the fire for thepurpose of destroying them. The fact that a game like this wassuffered to be openly played in Salem Village is quite remarkable, and shows that some license was left for such amusements. 

The records and files of the local courts show, that, notwithstandingthe austere gravity and strictness of manners and morals usuallyascribed to our New-England ancestors, occasional irregularitiesoccurred in the early settlements, which would be considered highmisdemeanors in our day. The following deposition was given "on oathbefore the Court, " Feb. 26, 1651. Edward Norris was the son of theminister of the First Church; had been for more than ten years, andcontinued to be for twenty years after, schoolmaster of the town; and, by his character as well as office, commanded the highest respect. John Kitchen, in 1655, was chosen "searcher and sealer of leather. "Giles Corey had not yet purchased his farm, but lived on his town-lot, extending from Essex Street, near its western extremity, to the NorthRiver. They were severally persons of good estate. 

 "THE TESTIMONY OF GILES COREY. --Mr. Edward Norris and I were going towards the brickkiln: John Kitchen, going with us, fell a nipping and pinching of us. And, when we came back again, John Kitchen struck up Mr. Edward Norris his heels and mine, and fell upon me, and catched me by the throat, and held me so long till he had almost stopped my breath. And I said unto John Kitchen, 'This is not good jesting. ' And John Kitchen replied, 'This is nothing: I do owe you more than this of old: this is not half of that which you shall have afterwards. ' After this, he went into his house, and he took stinking water and threw upon us, and took me and thrust me out of doors, and I went my ways. And John Kitchen followed me half-way up the lane, or thereabouts. Perceiving him to follow me, I went to go over the rails. He took me again, and threw me down off the rails, and fell a beating of me until I was all bloody. And, Thomas Bishop being present, I desired him to bear witness of what he saw. Upon my words, he let me rise. As soon as I was up, he fell a beating of me again. 

 "Testified on oath before the Court, 26th Feb. , 1651. 

 "HENRY BARTHOLOMEW, _Clerk_. "

This was indeed an extraordinary outburst of lawless violence, andgives a singular insight of the state of society. Such an occurrencein our day would create astonishment. The organized power of thecommunity to suppress vicious and rude passions was probably neverbrought to bear with greater rigidness than in our Puritan villages;but it did not fully accomplish its end. Behind and beneath the solemnand formal exterior, there was, after all, perhaps as muchirregularity of life as now. The nature of man had not been subdued. The people had their quarrels and fights, and their frolics andmerriments, in defiance of the restraints of authority. Violations oflocal and general laws were not infrequent; and flowed, as ever since, from intemperance, in as large a measure. Kitchen, in this instance, acted as if under the influence of liquor. His behavior, in trippingup the heels and throwing dirty water upon the person of theschoolmaster of the town, the dignity of whose social position isindicated by the title of "Mr. ;" and in giving to Corey such apersistent and gratuitous pommelling, --bears the aspect of a drunkendelirium. The latter seems not to have supposed, for some time, thathe was in earnest, but to have looked upon his conduct as rough play, which was carried rather too far. Poor Corey was often getting beforethe town Court as accused or accuser. He was, to the end, the victimof ill-usage, either given or taken. Though not a bad-natured man, hewas almost always in trouble. The tenor of his long life was aseccentric and unruly as the manner of his death was strange andhorrible. 

There was what may be called an institution in the rural parishes ofthe early times, still existing to some extent perhaps in countryplaces, which must not be omitted in an enumeration of controllinginfluences. The people lived on farms, at some distance from eachother, and almost all at great distances from the meeting-house. Localand parental authority, church discipline, public opinion, enforcedattendance upon the regular religious services. Fashion, habit, andchoice concurred in bringing all to meeting on the Lord's Day. It wasimpossible for many to return home during the intermission between theservices of the forenoon and afternoon. The effect was, that the wholecommunity were thrown and kept together every week for several hours, during which they could not avoid social intercourse. It was a moreeffective institution than the town-meeting; for it occurred oftener, and included women and children. In pleasant weather, they wouldperhaps gather together in knots at eligible places, or stroll off incompanies to the shades of the neighboring woods. In bad weather, theywould remain in the meeting-house, or congregate at Deacon Ingersoll'sordinary, or in the great rooms of his dwelling-house. As a whole, this practice must have produced important results upon the characterof the people. In the absence of newspapers, or of much intercoursewith remote places, the day was made the occasion for hearing andtelling all the news. It provided for the circulation of ideas, goodand bad. It widened the sphere of influence of the wiser and bettersort, and gave opportunity for mischievous people to do much harm. Itwas a sort of central bazaar, open every week, where all the varietiesof local gossip could be interchanged and circulated far and wide. Ofthe aggregate character of the effects thus produced, I do not proposeto strike the balance. It was undoubtedly an effective instrumentalityin moulding the population of the country, developing the elements ofsociety, quickening and rendering more vigorous the action of thepeople in masses, and elucidating the phenomena of their history. Itanswers my purpose, at present, to suggest, that, if any populardelusion or fanaticism arose, the means of giving it a rapiddiffusion, and of intensifying its power, were in this way provided. 

In the early settlement of the country, the pursuit of game in theforests, rivers, and lakes, was necessary as a means of subsistence, and has always been important in that view. A war against beasts andbirds of prey was also required to be incessantly kept up. The methodsadopted for these ends were various and ingenious, often requiringcourage and skill, and in most instances conducted in companies. Deerand moose were sometimes caged by surrounding them, or trapped; butthe gun was chiefly relied upon in their pursuit. There were variousmethods for catching the smaller animals. One of the sports of boyhoodwas to spring the rabbits or hares. A sapling, or young tree, was bentdown and fastened to a stick slid into notches cut in trees, on eachside of the path of the animal. The rabbit is wont to race through thewoods at great speed, and along established tracks, which, particularly after snow has fallen, are clearly traceable. To thecross-stick, thus placed above the path, one end of a stronghorse-hair was tied. The other end was in a slip-knot, with a noosejust large enough, and hanging at the height, to receive the head ofthe rabbit. Not seeing the noose, and rushing along the path, therabbit would jerk the cross-stick out of the notches. The tree wouldbound back to its original upright direction, and the rabbit remainswinging aloft, until, at the break of day, the boys would rejoice inthe success of their stratagem. Pigeons in clouds frequented thecountry in their seasons, and acres upon acres of the forests bowedbeneath their weight. They were taken by nets, dozens at a time, orbrought down in great numbers by shot-guns. The marshalled hosts ofwild geese made their noisy flights over the land in the spring andfall, traversing a space spanning the continent north and south. Theywere brought down by the gun, on the wing, or surprised while restingin their long route or stopped by storms, around secluded ponds orswamps. Ducks and other aquatic birds were abundant on the rivers andmarshes, and pursued in canoes along the bays and seashores. Salt-water fish were within reach in the neighboring ocean; while anunfailing supply of fresh-water fish was yielded by Wenham Lake, Wilkins's Pond, and the running streams. 

The bear was a formidable prowler around the settlements, killingyoung cattle, making havoc in the sheepfold, and depredating upon thebarn and farm yard. He was a dangerous antagonist, of immense strengthin his arms and claws. Sometimes he was reached effectually by thegun, but the trap was mainly relied upon to secure him. His skin madehim a valuable prize, and he supplied other beneficial uses. Theearliest and rudest method of trapping a bear was as follows: A placewas selected in the woods, where two large fallen and mouldering treeswere side by side within two or three feet of each other. The spacebetween them would be roofed over by throwing branches and boughsacross them, and closed up at one end. The other end would be leftopen. A gun was placed inside, heavily loaded, the muzzle towards theopen end; to the trigger a cord was fastened running along by thebarrel of the gun, passing over a cross-bar, and hanging down directlybefore the muzzle, baited with a piece of fresh meat. The bear, ranging in the woods at night, would be attracted by the smell ofmeat, and come snuffing around. At the open end, he would see thebait, rush in, seize it between his jaws, pull the cord, discharge thegun, and his head and breast be torn to pieces. The men engaged in theenterprise would remain awake in some neighboring house, waiting andlistening, with the extremest interest, for the report of the gun toannounce their success. At the break of day, they would gather to thespot, and participate in the profit of the capture. After a while, iron or steel traps were introduced. They would be skilfully baitedand set, and fastened to a tree by a chain. The whole was covered overwith light soil and leaves. The bear would make for the bait. Theweight of his paw would spring the trap. The iron-teeth would hold himfast till the morning. In his suffering and exasperation, it wouldrequire considerable effort to despatch him. In catching bears, aswell as foxes, much skill and art were needed. They were each verywary and cautious; and, where iron was used in the traps, some scentwas necessary to disguise the smell of the metal. All appearance ofhaving been disturbed had to be removed from the ground. Trappingbecame quite a science, and was a pursuit of much importance. 

Wolves were perhaps the most destructive of the beasts of prey. Although not so large or strong as bears, they were far more fierceand rapacious. Bears could be tamed, but wolves not. Bears were notdangerous, unless provoked, or suffering from hunger, or alarmed forthe safety of their young. It was thought that kind treatment wouldawaken strong attachment in them, but wolves were always snarling andferocious. They roamed mostly in packs, and would kill sheep, lambs, and poultry long after hunger was appeased. The farmers regarded themas their great enemy. A long and deep trench would be dug, lined withslippery logs, from which the bark had been taken, standing upright, and touching each other. The trench was covered by a slight framework, upon which leaves and dirt were scattered, to make the surface appearlike the surrounding territory. Some savory bait would be placed overit. The wolves, rushing on, would break through. Not being able toascend the sides, they would be found alive, the next morning, at thebottom. These were called "wolf-pits. " It was no easy matter todispose of or despatch the furious animals, and the wolf-pits wereoften the scenes of much excitement. There was another class ofanimals, --divided into different species, mostly according to theirsize, --smaller but fiercer than wolves, of extraordinary strength andactivity, called wild-cats, catamounts, or loup-cerviers, pronouncedby the farmers lucifees. These were only taken by the gun. It wasconsidered a useful public service, and no inconsiderable feat, tokill them. 

Some of the laborious employments, at that time, were especiallypromotive of social influence; for instance, the making and mendinghighways. This was secured by a tax, annually levied in town-meeting. The work was placed under the care and direction of surveyors, annually chosen. A small part of this tax, however, was paid in money. Most of it was "worked out. " At convenient seasons, when there was arespite from the ordinary farm work, the men of a neighborhood wouldcome together, in greater or less numbers, at a designated time andplace, with their oxen and implements. Working in unison, they wouldwork merrily and with energy; and, as the tough roots and deeplybedded rocks gave way to the pickaxe, crowbar, and chain, and roughplaces became smooth, the wilderness would echo back their voices ofgratulation, and a spirit of animating rivalry stimulate their toils. Many other operations were carried on, such as getting up hay from thesalt-marshes and building stone-walls, by neighbors working incompanies. 

Particular circumstances in the history of the population of SalemVillage contributed to keep up a condition of general intelligence, which served, to some degree, as a substitute for an organized systemof education. Indeed, any thing like regular schools was renderedimpossible by the then-existing circumstances. Clearings had made avery inconsiderable encroachment on the wilderness. There were hereand there farmhouses, with deep forests between. It was long beforeeasily traversable roads could be made. A schoolhouse placedpermanently on any particular spot would be within the reach of butvery few. Farmers most competent to the work, who had enjoyed theadvantages of some degree of education, and could manage to set apartany time for the purpose, were, in some instances, prevailed upon toreceive such children as were within reaching distance as pupils intheir own houses, to be instructed by them at stated times and for alimited period. Daniel Andrew rendered this service occasionally. Atone period, we find them practising the plan of a movable school andschoolmaster. He would be stationed in the houses of particularpersons, with whom the arrangement could be made, a month at a time, in the different quarters of the village, from Will's Hill to BassRiver. Of course, there was a great lack of elementary education. Fora considerable time, it was reduced to a very low point; and therewere heads of families, --men who had good farms, and possessed theconfidence and respect of their neighbors, --who appear not to havebeen able to write. 

It is difficult, however, to come to a definite estimate on thissubject, as the singular fact is discovered, that some persons, whocould write, occasionally preferred to "make their mark. " Ann Putnam, in executing her will, made her mark; but her confession, with her ownproper written signature, is spread out in the Church-book. FrancisNurse very frequently used his peculiar mark, representing, perhaps, some implement of his original mechanical trade; but, on otheroccasions, he wrote out his name in a good, round hand. The same wasthe case with Bray Wilkins. We can hardly reach any decisiveconclusions as to the intelligence or education of the people of thatday from their handwriting, or construction of sentences, much lessfrom their spelling. Their forms of speech were very different fromours in many respects. What, at first view, we might be apt to callerrors of ignorance, were perhaps conformity to good usage at thetime. Their use of verbs is different from ours, particularly in thesubjunctive mood, and in conjugation generally. They did not followour rule in reference to number. When the nominative was a pluralnoun, or several nouns, they often employ the connected verb in thesingular number, and _vice versâ_. They were inclined to makeconstruction conform to the sense, rather than to the letter. It isnot certain that their usage, in this particular, is whollyindefensible. Cicero, in his fifth oration against Verres, couples_rem_ with _futurum_. This was looked upon by some editors as anerror, and they altered the text accordingly; but Aulus Gelius, in his"Attic Nights, " maintains that it is the true reading, and, in view ofthe sense of the passage, a legitimate and elegant use of language. Hecites instances, in Latin and Greek authors of the highest standard, of a similar usage. 

Nothing, or scarcely any thing, can be inferred from spelling. It waswholly unsettled among the best-educated men, and in the practice ofthe same person. In Winthrop's "Journal, " he spells the name of hisdistinguished friend--the governor of both Massachusetts andConnecticut--sometimes Haynes, and sometimes Haines. The _r_ isgenerally dropped from his own signature, or, if not intentionallydropped, is quite lost in one or the other of the contiguous letters. It is a curious circumstance, that the name "Winthrop" is spelleddifferently by our governor, his wife, and his son, the governor ofConnecticut; each varying from either of the other two. GeorgeBurroughs, a graduate of Harvard College, wrote his own name sometimeswith, and sometimes without, the _s_. In our General-court records, the name of the first Captain Davenport is spelled in at least fourdifferent ways. The Putnams sometimes wrote their name Putman. Thename of the Nurses was often written Nourse, and sometimes Nurs. 

Unable to come to any reliable conclusions in reference to the generalintelligence of the people of Salem Village from their orthography, etymology, syntax, or chirography, compared with their contemporaries, I can only say, that, in examining the records and papers which havecome down to us, the wonder to me is that they expressed themselves sowell. I do not hesitate to say, that, in the various controversies inwhich they were involved, prior to and immediately after thewitchcraft delusion, there is a pervading appearance of uncommonappreciation of the questions at issue, and substantial evidence thatthere was a solid substratum of good sense among them. 

Their manners appear to have been remarkably courteous and respectful, showing the effect still remaining upon their style of intercourse andpersonal bearing, of the society and example of the great number ofeminent, enlightened, and accomplished men and families that hadresided or mingled with them during all the early period of theirhistory. In their deportment to each other, there was that sort ofdecorum which indicates good breeding. They paid honor to gray hairs, and assigned to age the first rank in seating the congregation, --amatter to which, before the introduction of pews as a particularproperty, they gave the greatest consideration. The "seating" was tocontinue for a year; and a committee of persons who would command thegreatest confidence was regularly appointed to report on the delicateand difficult subject. Their report, signed by them severally, wasentered in full in the parish record-book. The invariable rule was, first, age; then, office; last, rates. The chief seats were given toold men and women of respectable characters, without regard to theircircumstances in life or position in society. Then came the familiesof the minister and deacons, the parish committee and clerk, theconstable of the village, magistrates, and military officers. Thesewere preferred, because all offices were then honorable, and held, ifthey were called to them, by the principal people. Last camerates, --that is, property. The richest man in the parish, if notholding office, or old enough to be counted among the aged, would takehis place with the residue of the congregation. The manner in whichparents were spoken of on all occasions is quite observable, not onlyin written documents, but ordinary conversation, --always with tenderrespectfulness. In almost all cases, the expressions used are "myhonored father" or "my honored mother, " and this by persons in thehumblest and most inferior positions in life. The terms "Goodman" and"Goodwife" were applied to the heads of families. The latter word wasabbreviated to "Goody, " but not at all, as our dictionaries have it, as a "low term of civility. " It was applied to the most honoredmatrons, such as the wife of Deacon Ingersoll. It was a term ofrespect; conveying, perhaps, an affectionate sentiment, but not in theslightest degree disrespectful, derogatory, or belittling. Surely nobetter terms were ever used to characterize a worthy person. "Goodman"comprehends all that can be ascribed to a citizen of mature years inthe way of commendation; and the whole catalogue of pretentious titlesever given by flatterers or courtiers to a married lady cannot, allcombined, convey a higher encomium than the term "Goodwife. " How muchmore expressive, courteous to the persons to whom they are applied, and consistent with the self-respect of the person using them, than"Mr. " and "Mrs. "! A more than questionable taste and a foolish pridehave led us to adopt these terms because they were originallyapplicable to the gentry or to magistrates, and to abandon the goodold words which had a meaning truly polite to others, and notdegrading to ourselves!

A patriarchal authority and dignity was recognized in families. Theoldest member was often called, by way of distinction, "Landlord, "merely on account of his seniority, without reference particularly tothe extent of his domain or the value of his acres. After the deathof Thomas Putnam, in 1686, his brother Nathaniel had the title; afterhim, the surviving brother, Captain John; after him, it fell to thenext generation, and Benjamin, a son of Nathaniel, became "LandlordPutnam. " It was so with other families. 

The liberal and judicious policy, before described, of giving estatesto children on their marriage, with the maintenance of parentalauthority in the household, produced the desired effect upon thecharacter of the people. It was almost a matter of course, that, onreaching mature years, young men and women would own the covenant, andbecome members of the church. The general tone of society wasundoubtedly favorable to the moral and religious welfare of theyounger portion of the community. Some exceptions occurred, but few innumber. One case, however, in which there was a flagrant violation offilial duty, may not be omitted in this connection; for it belongs tothe public history of the country. 

John Porter, Jr. , the eldest son of the founder of that mostrespectable family, about thirty years of age, appears to have been avery wicked and incorrigible person. His abusive treatment of hisparents reached a point where it became necessary, in the last resort, to appeal to the protection of the law. After various proceedings, hewas finally sentenced to stand on the ladder of the gallows with arope around his neck for an hour; to be severely whipped; committed tothe House of Correction; kept closely at work on prison diet, not tobe released until so ordered by the Court of Assistants or the GeneralCourt; and to pay "a fine to the country of two hundred pounds. " It isstated, that, if the mother of the culprit "had not been overmoved byher tender affections to forbear appearing against him, the Court mustnecessarily have proceeded with him as a capital offender, accordingto our law being grounded upon and expressed in the Word of God, inDeut. Xxi. 18 to 21. See Capital Laws, p. 9, § 14. " Some timeafterward, the General Court, upon his petition, granted him a releasefrom imprisonment, on condition of his immediate departure from thisjurisdiction; first giving a bond of two hundred pounds not to returnwithout leave of the General Court or Court of Assistants. 

In 1664, four commissioners, Colonel Richard Nichols, Sir Robert Carr, George Cartwright, and Samuel Maverick, Esqs. , were sent over byCharles II. "to hear and determine complaints and appeals in allcauses, as well military as criminal and civil. " There had always beena powerful influence at work in the English Court adverse to NewEngland. It had been thus far successfully baffled by the admirablediplomacy of the colonial government and agents. All conflicts ofauthority had been prevented from coming to a head by a skilful policyof "protracting and avoiding. " But the restoration of the Stuartsboded no good to the liberties of the colonies; and the arrival ofthese commissioners with their sweeping authority was regarded asdesigned to deal the long-deferred fatal blow at chartered rights. They began with a high hand. The General Court did not quail beforethem, but stood ready to take advantage of the first false step of thecommissioners; and they did not have long to wait. 

Porter had taken refuge in Rhode Island. When the commissionersvisited that colony, he appealed to them for redress against theMassachusetts General Court. They were inconsiderate enough to espousehis cause, and issued a proclamation giving him protection to returnto Boston to have his case tried before them. The General Court atonce took issue with them, and changed their attitude from thedefensive to the offensive; denounced their proceedings; spread uponthe official records a full account, in the plainest language, ofPorter's outrages upon his parents, exhibiting it in details thatcould not but shock every sentiment of humanity and decency; holdingup the commissioners as the abettors and protectors of criminality ofthe deepest dye; and planting themselves fair and square against themon the merits of Porter's case. The commissioners tried to explain andextricate themselves; but they could not escape from the toils inwhich, through rashness, they had become entangled. The General Courtmade a public declaration charging the commissioners with "obstructingthe sentence of justice passed against that notorious offender, " andwith sheltering and countenancing "his rebellion against his naturalparents;" with violating a court of justice, discharging a wholecountry "from their oaths whereby they had sworn obedience to HisMajesty's authority according to the Constitution of his RoyalCharter;" and with attempting to overthrow the rights of the colonyunder the charter by bringing in a military force to overawe andsuppress the civil authorities. They denounced them as guilty of aperversion of their trust, and as having committed a breach upon thedignity of the crown, by pursuing a course "derogatory to HisMajesty's authority here established, " and "repugnant to His Majesty'sprincely and gracious intention in betrusting them with such acommission. " The Court held the vantage-ground, and the commissionerswere unable to dislodge them. The end of the matter was, that thepower of the commissioners was completely broken down. Theyingloriously gave up the contest, and went home to England. 

The instance of John Porter, Jr. , to which such extraordinarypublicity and prominence were given by the circumstances now related, does not bear against what I have said of the general prevalence, inthe rural community of Salem Village, of parental authority and filialduty, as he was early withdrawn from it to pursuits that led him intototally different spheres of life. He had been engaged in trade, andexposed to vicious influences in foreign ports. In voyages to"Barbadoes, and so for England, he had prodigally wasted and riotouslyexpended about four hundred pounds. " Besides this, he had run himself, by his vicious courses, into debts which his father had to pay inorder to release him from prison abroad. He came back the desperatecharacter described by the General Court. His punishment was severe, but absolutely necessary, in the judgment of the whole community, forthe safety of his parents and the preservation of domestic and publicorder. 

Although living in humble dwellings on plain fare, working with theirhands for daily bread, clad in rude garments, and practising a frugaleconomy, there was a certain style of things about the people I amdescribing unlike what is ordinarily associated with our ideas ofthem. The men wore swords or rapiers as a part of their daily apparel. Their wives had domestic servants. Every farmer had his hiredlaborers, and many of them had slaves. The relation of servitude, however, differed from that on Southern plantations in many respects. The slaves, without any formal manumission, easily obtained theirfreedom, and often became landholders. The courteous decorum acquiredfrom the example of the eminent men among the first planters longcontinued to mark the manners of this people; and its vestiges remainto the present day. It strikingly appeared in the latter half of thelast and the earlier period of this century in the persons of JudgeSamuel Houlton, Colonel Israel Hutchinson, General Moses Porter, andthe late Judge Samuel Putnam. 

The wise forethought of the company in London, at the outset of itsoperations, in providing for all that was needful to the establishmentand welfare of the colony, has already been described. It was moststrikingly illustrated in the careful selection of the firstemigrants. Men were sought out who were experienced and skilful in thevarious mechanic arts. In the early population of Salem Farms, everyspecies of handicraft was represented. When the number was less than ahundred householders, there were weavers, spinners, potters, joiners, housewrights, wheelwrights, brickmakers and masons, blacksmiths, coopers, painters, tailors, cordwainers, glovers, tanners, millers, maltsters, skinners, sawyers, tray-makers, and dish-turners. Everyabsolute want was provided for. These trades and callings were carriedon in connection with agricultural employments, and their continuancekept carefully in view by the heads of the principal families. JohnPutnam not only gave large farms to each of his sons, but he trainedthem severally to some mechanical art. One was a weaver, another abricklayer, &c. The farmer was also a mechanic, and every descriptionof useful labor held in equal honor. 

Another marked feature of this people was their military spirit. Theywere kept in a state of universal and thorough organization to protectthemselves from Indian hostilities, or to respond, on any occasion, ata moment's warning, to the call of the country. The sentinel at thewatch-house was ever on the alert. Authority was early obtained fromthe General Court to form a foot company. All adults of everydescription, including men much beyond middle life, --every one, infact, who could carry a musket, belonged to it. Its officers were thefathers of the village. Every title of rank, from corporal to captain, once obtained, was worn ever after through life. Jonathan Walcot, acitizen of the highest respectability, who had married as a secondwife Deliverance a daughter of Thomas Putnam, and was one of thedeacons of the parish, was its captain. Nathaniel Ingersoll, the otherdeacon, is spoken of from time to time as corporal, then sergeant, andfinally lieutenant. He served with that commission till late in life, and was always, after attaining that rank, known as either Lieutenantor Deacon Ingersoll. The eldest son of Thomas Putnam, a leading memberof the church, a man of large property, and the clerk of the parish, was one of the sergeants, always known as such. In our narrative, withwhich he will be found in most unfortunate connection, I shall speakof him by that title. It will distinguish him from his father. This"company" had frequent drills, probably from the first, in the fieldleft by will afterwards for that purpose by Nathaniel Ingersoll. Often, no doubt, it paraded on the open grounds around themeeting-house, or in the fields of Joseph Hutchinson after the harvesthad been gathered. It marched and countermarched along the neighboringroads. It was almost as much thought of as the "church, " officered bythe same persons, and composed of the same men. It was a commonpractice, at the close of a parade, before "breaking line, " for thecaptain to give notices of prayer, church, or parish meetings. Suchmen as Richard Leach, Thomas Fuller, and Nathaniel Putnam, esteemed itan honor to bear titles in this company; and held them ever afterthrough life with pride, whether corporal, sergeant, lieutenant, orcaptain. 

A company of troopers was early formed, made up from the village andneighboring settlements. In the colonial records, under date of Oct. 8, 1662, we find the following: "Mr. George Corwin for captain, Mr. Thomas Putnam for lieutenant, Mr. Walter Price for cornet, beingpresented to this Court as so chosen by the troopers of Salem, Lynn, &c. , the Court allows and approves thereof. " The inventory of CaptainCorwin, before cited, indicates the stylish uniform he wore as captainof the troopers. Each of the officers was a wealthy man; and it cannotbe doubted that a parade of the company was a dashing affair. Thelapse of time having thinned their ranks and removed their officers, avigorous and successful attempt was made in October, 1678, to revivethe company. Thirty-six men, belonging, as they say, "to the reserveof Salem old troop, " and very desirous "of being serviceable to Godand the country, " petition the General Court to re-organize them as atroop of horse, and to issue the necessary commissions. They requestthe appointment of William Brown, Jr. , as captain, and Corporal JohnPutnam as lieutenant. The petition was granted, and the commissionsissued. Among the signers of this petition are Anthony Needham, Peterand Ezekiel Cheever, Thomas Flint, Thomas and Benjamin Wilkins, Thomas and Jacob Fuller, John Procter, William Osborne, Thomas Putnam, Jr. , and others of the Farms. The officers named were men of propertyand energy; and the company of troopers was kept up ever afterwards, until all danger from Indians or other foes had passed away. 

It is very observable how the military spirit with which this ruralcommunity was so early imbued has descended through all generations. Israel Putnam, the famous Revolutionary hero, a son of Joseph who wasa younger brother of Sergeant Thomas and Deacon Edward Putnam, wasborn in the village. His brother David, much older than himself, whoflourished in the period anterior to the Revolution, was a celebratedcavalry officer. Colonel Timothy Pickering used to mention, among therecollections of his boyhood, that David Putnam "rode the best horsein the province. " General Rufus Putnam, a grandson of Deacon Edward, was a distinguished brigadier in the army of the Revolution. There arefew officers of that army whose names are more honored than his byencomiums from the pen of Washington: and praise from him was praiseindeed, for it was, like all his other judgments, the result ofcareful and discriminating observation. In a letter to the Presidentof Congress, dated "At camp above Trenton Falls, Dec. 20, 1776, " hespeaks of the fact, that, owing to a neglect on the part of theGovernment to place the Engineer Department upon a proper footing, "Colonel Putnam, who was at the head of it, has quitted, and taken aregiment in the State of Massachusetts. " He expresses the opinion, that Putnam's qualifications as a military engineer were superior tothose of any other man within his knowledge, far superior to those ofthe foreign officers whom he had seen. In a letter to the same, dated"Pompton Plains, " July 12, 1777, speaking of General Schuyler's army, he says, "Colonel Putnam, I imagine, will be with him before this, ashis regiment is a part of Nixon's Brigade, who will answer everypurpose he can possibly have for an engineer at this crisis. " The highopinion of Washington took effect in his promotion asbrigadier-general. At the end of the war, he returned to civil life, but was soon called back and re-commissioned as brigadier-general. Washington felt the need of him. In a letter to General Knox, Secretary of War, dated Aug. 13, 1792, he says, "General Putnam meritsthanks, in my opinion, for his plan, and the sentiments he hasdelivered on what he conceives to be a proper mode of carrying on thewar against the hostile nations of Indians; and I wish he wouldcontinue to furnish them without reserve in future. " DuringWashington's administration of the government under the Constitution, Rufus Putnam held the office of Surveyor-General of the United States. In addition to his military reputation, he will be for ever memorableas the first settler of Marietta, and founder of the State of Ohio. 

Israel Hutchinson was born in 1727. In 1757 he was one of ascouting-party under the command of his neighbor, Captain IsraelHerrick, that penetrated through the wilderness in Maine in perilousIndian warfare. He fought at Ticonderoga and Lake George, and was withWolfe when he scaled the Heights of Abraham. On the morning of the19th of April, 1775, he led a company of minute-men, who met andfought the British in their bloody retreat from Lexington. He wasprominently concerned during the siege of Boston; and, on itsevacuation, took command at Fort Hill. He was afterwards in command atForts Lee and Washington. Throughout the war, he, like both thePutnams, had the confidence of his commander-in-chief. For twenty-oneyears, he was elected to one or the other branch of the Legislature, or to the Council. He was distinguished for the courtesy of hismanners and the dignity of his address. Colonel Enoch Putnam was alsoat the battle of Lexington, and served with honor through theRevolutionary War, as did also Captain Jeremiah Putnam, both of themdescendants of John. Captain Samuel Flint was among the bravest of thebrave at Lexington, exciting universal admiration by his intrepidity;and fell at the head of his company at Stillwater, Oct. 7, 1777. 

Intelligence of the marching of the British towards Lexington, on the19th of April, 1775, reached the lower part of Danvers about nineo'clock that morning. With a rapidity that is perfectly marvellous, when we consider the distances from each other over which theinhabitants were scattered, five companies, fully organized andequipped, --each of them containing men of the village, --rushed to thefield in time to meet the retreating enemy at West Cambridge. It was arally and a march without precedent, and never yet surpassed. The daywas extremely sultry for the season; and the distance traversed bymany of the men from the village, before they got into that fight, could not have been less than twenty miles. Seven belonging to Danverscompanies were killed, and others wounded. A larger offering was madethat day at the baptismal sacrifice to American liberty by Danversthan by any other town except Lexington; and no town represented inthe scene was more remote. Of the men who fell on this occasion, thefollowing appear to have been of the village: Samuel Cook, BenjaminDaland, and Perley Putnam, --the last a descendant of John. Theirbodies were brought home, and buried with appropriate honors; twocompanies from Salem, and military detachments from Newburyport, Amesbury, and Salisbury participating in the ceremonies, and givingthe soldier's tribute to their glory, by volleys over their closinggraves. 

Moses Porter, when eighteen years of age, attracted attention by hisheroic courage and indomitable pluck at Bunker Hill. He was in anartillery company, and would not quit his gun when almost every otherman had fallen. His country never allowed him to quit it afterwards. From that day, he bore a commission in the army of the United States. He was retained on every peace establishment, always in theartillery, and at the head of that arm of the service for a greatlength of time, and until the day of his death. He was in the battleof Brandywine, and wounded in a subsequent fight on the banks of theDelaware. He was with Wayne in his campaign against the WesternIndians, and won his share of the glory that crowned it in the finalbloody and decisive conflict. He was at the head of the artillery whenthe war of 1812 took place, in active service on the Niagara frontier, and on the 10th of September, 1813, brevetted "for distinguishedservices. " He commanded at Norfolk, in Virginia, in 1814, and receivedgreat credit for the ability and vigilance with which he held thatmost vital point of the coast defence. At successive periods after thewar, he was at the head of each of the geographical military divisionsof the country. He died at Cambridge, Mass. , in 1822, while in commandof the Eastern Department, near the scene of his youthful glory, forty-seven years before. No man who fought at Bunker Hill remained solong a soldier of the United States. No man had so extended a record, and it was bright with honor from the beginning to the end. Hispre-eminent reputation, as a disciplinarian and artillerist of thehighest class, was uniformly maintained. He added to the sternerqualities required by professional duty a polished urbanity ofmanners, and a dignified and commanding aspect and bearing. His ashesrest beneath the sod of his ancestral acres in Salem Village. 

When the great war for the suppression of the Southern Rebellion cameon, and the life of the Union was at stake, the same old spirit wasfound unabated. A descendant of the family of Raymonds, emulating theexample of his ancestors, rallied his company to the front. At the endof the war, Lieutenant-Colonel John W. Raymond brought back, incommand, the remnant of his veteran regiment, with its tatteredbanners; two of his predecessors in that commission having fallen inbattle. The youthful patriot, William Lowell Putnam, who fell atBall's Bluff on the 21st of October, 1861, was a direct descendant ofNathaniel Putnam. It is an interesting circumstance, that the names ofmen who trained in the foot company and with the troopers on thefields and roads about the village meeting-house two hundred years agohave re-appeared in the persons of their descendants, in the highestlines of service and with unsurpassed distinction, in the three greatwars of America, --Major-General Israel, and Brigadier-General Rufus, Putnam, in the War of the Revolution; Brigadier-General Moses Porter, in the War of 1812; and Major-General Granville M. Dodge, in the Warof the Rebellion. The last-named is a descendant of a hero of theNarragansett fight, and was born and educated in Salem Village. 

Several lawsuits, particularly in land cases, have been referred to. They indicate, perhaps, to some extent the ingredients that aggravatedthe terrible scenes we are preparing to contemplate. They served tokeep up the general intelligence of the community through a periodnecessarily destitute of such means of information as we enjoy. Attendance upon courts of law, serving on juries, having to givetestimony at trials, are indeed in themselves no unimportant part inthe education of a people. Principles and questions of great momentare forced upon general attention, and become topics of discussion inplaces of gathering and at private firesides. Of this material ofintelligence, the people of the village had their full share. It wastheir fate to have their minds, and more or less their passions, stirred up by special local controversies thrust upon them. As areligious society, they had difficult points of disagreement with themother-church, and the town of Salem. While they were supporting aminister and trying to build a meeting-house for themselves, attemptswere made to tax them to support the minister and build a newmeeting-house in the town. There was a natural reluctance to part withthem, and it was long before an arrangement could be made. The greatdistance of many of the farmers from the town prevented theirexercising what they deemed their rightful influence in municipalaffairs. They felt, that, in many respects, their interests were notidentical, and in some absolutely at variance. These topics were muchdiscussed, and with considerable feeling at times on both sides. Thepapers which remain relating to the subject show that the farmersunderstood it in all its bearings, and maintained their cause withclearness of perception and forcibleness of argument and expression. At one time, they were very desirous to be set off as a distincttown, but this could not be allowed; and, finally, a sort ofcompromise was effected. A partial separation--asemi-municipality--was agreed upon. Salem Village was the result. 

In 1670, a petition, with twenty signers, was presented to the town tobe set off as a parish, and be allowed to provide a minister forthemselves. In March, 1672, the town granted the request; and, inOctober following, the General Court approved of the project, and gaveit legal effect. The line agreed upon by the town and the village issubstantially defined by the vote of the former, which was as follows:"All farmers that now are, or hereafter shall be, willing to jointogether for providing a minister among themselves, whose habitationsare above Ipswich Highway, from the horse bridge to the wooden bridge, at the hither end of Mr. Endicott's Plain, and from thence on a westline, shall have liberty to have a minister by themselves; and whenthey shall provide and pay him in a maintenance, that then they shallbe discharged from their part of Salem ministers' maintenance, " &c. The "horse bridge" was across Bass River. The "wooden bridge" was atthe head of Cow-House or Endicott River. Ipswich highway runs alongfrom one of these points to the other. The south line, beyond thewooden bridge, is seen on the map. All to the north of this line, andof Ipswich highway between the bridges, to the bounds of Beverly andWenham on the east; Topsfield, Rowley Village, --since Boxford, andAndover on the north; and Reading and Lynn on the west, --was theVillage. Middleton, incorporated afterwards, absorbed a large part ofits western portion; but, at the time of the witchcraft delusion, theVillage was bounded as above described, and as in the map. There was aspecific arrangement fixing the point of time when the farmers were tobecome exempt from all charges in aid of the mother-church; that is, as soon as they had provided for the support of a minister and theerection of a meeting-house of their own. It was further stipulated, that the villagers should not form a church until a minister wasordained; and that they should not settle a minister permanentlywithout the approval of the old church, and its consent to proceed toan ordination. This latter restriction was perhaps the cause of allthe subsequent troubles. 

Owing, as has been stated in another connection, to erroneous notionsabout the topography of the country; the incompetency perhaps, in somecases, of surveyors; and the want of due care in the General Court andthe towns to have boundaries clearly defined, --uncertainties andconflicting claims arose in various portions of the colony, butnowhere to a greater extent than here. The village became involved incontroversies about boundaries with each one of its neighbors;producing, at times, much exasperation. The documents drawn forth onthese questions, as they appear in the record-book of the village, arewritten with ability, and show that there were men among them who knewhow to express and enforce their views. The plain, lucid, well-considered style of Nathaniel Ingersoll's depositions on thecourt-files, in numerous cases, render it not improbable that his penwas put in requisition. Sergeant Thomas Putnam, the parish recorder, as he was sometimes entitled, was a good writer. His chirography, although not handsome, is singularly uniform, full, open, and clear, so easily legible that it is a refreshment to meet with it; and hissentences are well-constructed, simple, condensed, and to the purpose. His words do their office in conveying his meaning. No public bodyever had a better clerk. Somehow or other, he and others, brought upin the woods, had contrived to acquire considerable efficiency in theuse of the pen. Perhaps, a few who, like him, had parents able toafford it, had been sent to Ipswich or Charlestown to enjoy theprivilege of what Cotton Mather calls "the Cheverian education. "

The southern boundary of the village was intended to run due west fromthe Ipswich road to Lynn, and was accordingly spoken of as "on a westline. " As originally established, it was defined by an enumeration ofa variety of objects such as trees of different kinds and sizes, asrunning through the lands of John Felton, Nathaniel Putnam, andAnthony Needham, to "a dry stump standing at the corner of WidowPope's cow-pen, leaving her house and the saw-mill within the farmer'srange, " and so on to "the top of the hill by the highway side nearBerry Pond. " From the changeable conditions of some of the objects, and a diversity of methods adopted by surveyors, --many of them beingunacquainted with, or making no allowance for, the variation of thecompass, --controversies arose with the mother-town: and someproprietors, like the Gardners, were left in doubt how the lineaffected them; and there was, in consequence, much disquietude. Theline was not accurately run until 1700. 

It is observable, that the "saw-mill" is still in operation on thesame spot. The "cow-pen, " then on the south side of the mill, was, more than a century ago, removed to the north side, where it hasremained ever since. This estate has interesting reminiscences. It wasan original grant in January, 1640, to Edward Norris, at the time ofhis settlement as pastor of the First Church in Salem. He sold toEleanor Trussler in 1654. It then went into the possession of HenryPhelps, who sold to Joseph Pope in 1664. His widow, Gertrude, owned itin 1672. In 1793, Eleazer Pope sold to Nathaniel Ropes, son of JudgeRopes, of Salem. His heirs sold it back to the Phelpses; and it is nowin the possession of the Rev. Willard Spaulding, of Salem. Originallygiven as an ordination present to a minister of the old town, it has, after the lapse of two hundred and twenty-six years, come round intothe hands of another. The house in which the Popes lived one hundredand twenty-nine years, and the families that succeeded them for abovehalf a century more, --a venerable and picturesque specimen of therural architecture, in its best form, of the earliest times, --has, within the last ten years, given place to a new one on the same spot. In that old house, besides unnumbered and unknown instances of thesame sort, Israel Putnam conducted his courtship; and there, on the19th of July, 1739, he was married to Hannah, daughter of Joseph Pope. 

Contests for what they deemed their rights with the old church and theborder towns and their own town, as in the case just mentioned, undoubtedly produced a bad effect upon the temper of the people, byoccasional expenses that consumed their substance, and incidents thatsowed the seeds of personal animosities; preparing the way for thatdreadful convulsion which was near at hand. At the very time when thewitchcraft frenzy broke out, they were in the crisis of anexasperating conflict with Topsfield, occasioned by a wrong done themby the General Court. This requires to be explained, as it can be, bya collation of facts of record. 

On the 3d of March, 1636, the General Court passed an order that thebounds of Salem, Ipswich, and Newbury, should extend six miles intothe country. It was afterwards defined to mean that "the six-mileextent, " as it was called, should be measured from the meeting-housesof the respective towns. On the 5th of November, 1639, the GeneralCourt passed an order in these words: "Whereas the inhabitants ofSalem have agreed to plant a village near the river that runs toIpswich, it is ordered that all the land near their bounds betweenSalem and the said river, not belonging to any other town or person byany former grant, shall belong to the said village. " On the strengthof this order, the farmers in that part of Salem pushed settlementsout beyond the "six-mile extent, " over the ground thus pledged tothem; cleared off the forests, built houses, brought the land underculture, erected bridges, made roads, and fulfilled their part of thecontract by preparing to establish their village. Four years after theGeneral Court had thus pledged to "inhabitants of Salem" theprivileges of a village organization on the lands between "Salem andthe said river, " they authorized some inhabitants of Ipswich, who hadgone there, to establish the village on the territory, independent ofthe Salem men. This was an unjustifiable and flagrant violation of thestipulated agreement on the part of the General Court; because itappears by their own records, that Salem farmers had promptlyfulfilled the condition on their part by going directly upon theground, and getting farms under way there before 1643. This carelessand indefensible procedure by the General Court was the cause ofinterminable trouble and strife on the tract between Salem bounds andthe river, introduced the elements of discord, and gave a color oflegal justification to a conflict of authority between Salem andIpswich men. It sowed the seeds of animosities which aggravated thescenes that occurred in Salem Village in 1692. In 1658, the GeneralCourt passed an order creating the town of Topsfield, including thelarger part of these lands within its limits. No heed was paid to theremonstrances, against these proceedings, of the Salem farmers, whofound themselves, without their consent, permanently bereft of thebenefit that had been promised them, cut off from all connection withthe town of Salem, to which they originally belonged, and put in theoutskirts of another town. It was a clear case of wrong, and ought tohave been rectified. But public bodies are more reluctant even thanindividuals to acknowledge themselves in fault. The people of SalemVillage joined in earnest protests against the acts of the GeneralCourt. The old town of Salem declared by a public vote, that they hadalways regarded the lands in controversy as belonging to the villagewhich, under the plighted faith of the General Court, theirinhabitants had been forming. But it was all in vain. Neither remedynor reparation could be obtained. The struggle against this injusticelasted until some time after the witchcraft occurrences hadterminated, and was finally brought to a close by an order of theCourt, that the people on the territory might maintain parishrelations with Salem Village or with Topsfield, at their individualoption. Entire satisfaction was never realized until, in 1728, theywere incorporated, in accordance with their petition, into a township, under the name of Middleton, with parts of Topsfield, Boxford, andAndover added. During a period of half a century, this grievanceremained unadjusted. The proceedings on the part of the village in itspublic action, as shown in the records, were conducted with skill, ability, and firmness. But the collisions that occurred betweenparticular parties were violent and bitter. Salem settlers were calledto pay parish and town rates to Topsfield, but refused to do it. Constables and tax-collectors were defied. Topsfield went so far as toclaim not only unoccupied lands, but lands within fence, with houseson them, and families within them, and orchards and growing fieldsaround them, as part of its "commons;" and it disputed the titlesgiven by Salem. Of course, the question went, in various forms, intothe county courts; but sometimes, there is reason to believe, it cameto a rougher arbitrament, in the depths of the woods, between man andman. 

John Putnam had gone out and settled lands between the "six-mileextent" of Salem and Ipswich River. Some of his sons had gone withhim. They had two dwelling-houses, cultivated meadows, orchards, &c. Isaac Burton says, that, one day, when near John Nichols's house, heheard a tree fall in the woods; and that he went to see who waschopping there. It seems that Jacob Towne and John How, Topsfield men, had come in defiance of John Putnam, and cut down a tree before hisface. As they were two to one, Putnam had to swallow the insult; buthe was not the man to let it rest so. He went out shortly after, accompanied by an adequate force of sons and nephews, and proceeded tofell the trees. The sound of the axes reached the ears of theTopsfield men; and Isaac Easty, Sr. , John Easty, John Towne, andJoseph Towne, Jr. , undertook to put a stop to the operation. Onreaching the spot, they warned Putnam against cutting timber. Hereplied, "The timber now and here cut down has been felled by me andmy orders;" and he proceeded to say, "I will keep cutting and carryingaway from this land until next March. " They asked him, "What, byviolence?" He answered, "Aye, by violence. You may sue me: you knowwhere I dwell;" and, turning to his company, he said, "Fall on. " ThePutnams were evidently the stronger party; and the Topsfield men, counting forces, concluded, in their turn, that discretion, at thattime, was the better part of valor. Such scenes occurred on thedisputed ground for a whole generation. It is not wonderful that allsorts of animosities were kindled. The fact will be borne in mind, that Isaac Easty and son, with John Towne and son, constituted theTopsfield force on this occasion. 

It cannot be doubted, that these controversies with the surroundingtowns, the mother-church, and the General Court itself, graduallyengendered a very bad state of feeling. The people were deeplyimpressed with a conviction that they had been wronged all around andall the way through. They felt that the whole world was against them;and when, by a train of mischievous influences, hell itself seemed tobe let loose upon them, it is not strange that they were driven todistraction. 

We come, at last, to that chapter in the history of Salem Villagewhich will lead us directly to the witchcraft delusion. Its religiousorganization was somewhat peculiar; and, although instituted by aparticular arrangement made by the General Court, was, in one or twofeatures, a complete departure from the ecclesiastical polityelsewhere rigidly enforced. It was a congregation forbidden, for thetime being, to have a church. It was a society for religious worship, administered, not by professors of religion or by persons regarded atall in a religious light, but by householders. The people of thevillage liked it, perhaps, all the better for this; and they took holdof it with a will. Joseph Houlton gave to the parish five and a halfacres of land, in the centre of the village, for the use of theminister. A parsonage-house was built, "forty-two feet in length, twenty feet broad, thirteen-feet stud, four chimneys, and nogable-ends. " It was the custom to have a leanto attached to theirhouses, generally on the northern side; and one was finally added tothe parsonage. There was a garden within the enclosure. JosephHutchinson gave an acre out of his broad meadow as a site for themeeting-house and it was erected; "thirty-four feet in length, twenty-eight feet broad, and sixteen feet between joints. " Two endgalleries were added, and a "canopy" placed over the pulpit. Themother-church, having about the same time built a new meeting-house, voted to give "the farmers their old pulpit and deacons' seats, " whichwere brought up and duly installed. In the course of theseproceedings, some slight differences arose among them about matters ofdetail, but not more than is usual in such cases. In order todespatch at once all that may be required to be said about themeeting-houses of the village, it may be allowable here to mention, that the original building did not survive the century. In 1700, partly because the growth of the society began to require it, butmainly, no doubt, to escape from the painful associations which hadbecome connected with it, a new meeting-house was built on anothersite. The old one was dismantled of all its removable parts, and thesite reverted to Joseph Hutchinson. It is supposed that he removed theframe to the other side of the road, and converted it into a barn; andthat it was used as such until, in the memory of old persons nowliving, it mouldered, crumbled into powder-post, and sunk to theground. It stood, after being converted into a barn, on the south sideof the road, nearly in front of Joseph Hutchinson's homestead. Hutchinson's dwelling-house was probably some distance further down inthe field, where the remains of an old cellar are still to be seen. Nathaniel Ingersoll gave the land for the new meeting-house. Therecords contain the vote, that it "shall stand upon Watch-House Hill, before Deacon Ingersoll's door. " The meeting-houses of the societyhave stood there ever since. At that time, it was an elevated spot, probably covered with the original forest; for the work of clearing, levelling, and preparing it for occupancy was so considerable as torequire a special provision. The labor and expense of the operationwere put on that portion of the congregation brought nearer to themeeting-house by the change of the site. 

In urging their petition to be set off as an independent parish, distinct from the First Church in Salem, the people of the villagedeclared, that, if they could not have a ministry established amongthem, they would soon "become worse than the heathen around them. "Little did they foresee the immediate, long-continued, and terribleeffects that were to follow the boon thus prayed for. Theestablishment of the ministry among them was not merely an opening ofPandora's box: it was emptying and shaking it over their heads. It ledthem to a condition of bitterness and violence, of confusion andconvulsion, of horror and misery, of cruelty and outrage, worse thanheathen ever experienced or savages inflicted. 

James Bayley of Newbury, born Sept. 12, 1650, a graduate of HarvardCollege in the class of 1669, was employed to preach at the village. In October, 1671, he transferred his relations from the church inNewbury to the First Church in Salem. It seems that several persons ofconsiderable influence in the village were dissatisfied with themanner in which he had been brought forward, and became prejudicedagainst him. The disaffection was not removed, but suffered to takedeep root in their minds. The parish soon became the scene of one ofthose violent and heated dissensions to which religious societies aresometimes liable. The unhappy strife was aggravated from day to day, until it spread alienation and acrimony throughout the village. Amajority of the people were all along in favor of Bayley; but theminority were implacable. His engagement to preach was renewed fromyear to year. At length, the controversy waxed so warm that somedefinite action became necessary. On the 10th of March, 1679, bothparties applied to the mother-church for advice. A paper was presentedby his opponents, with sixteen, and another from his friends, withthirty-nine signers. There was still another, also in his favor, signed by ten persons living near, but not within the village line. Although the number of his opponents was so much less than of hisfriends, they included persons, such as Nathaniel Putnam and BrayWilkins, of large estates and families, and much general influence;and it is evident that the First Church was not inclined wholly todisregard them. The record of that church says, "There was muchagitation on both sides, and divers things were spoken of by thebrethren; but the business being long, and many of the brethren gone, we could not make a church act of advice in the case; therefore it wasleft to another time. " At a meeting on the 22d of April, the SalemChurch advised the minority "to submit to the generality for thepresent;" but, when a church should be formed there, "then they mightchoose him or any other. " This advice does not appear to havesatisfied either party; and the quarrel went on with renewed vehemenceon both sides. At length, it reached such a pitch that it becamenecessary to carry it up to the General Court. The whole affair wasinvestigated by that body, and all the papers that had passed inrelation to it were adduced. They are quite voluminous, and on file inthe office of the Secretary of State, in Boston. These interesting andcurious documents illustrate the energy of action of both parties; andgive, it is probable, the best picture anywhere to be found of afirst-rate parish controversy of the olden times. 

The General Court came down upon the case with a strong hand. Theydecided in favor of Bayley, whom they pronounced "orthodox, andcompetently able, and of a blameless and self-denying conversation;"and they "do order, that Mr. Bayley be continued and settled theminister of that place, and that he be allowed sixty pounds per annumfor his maintenance, one-third part thereof in money, the othertwo-thirds in provisions of all sorts such as a family needs, at equalprices, and fuel for his family's occasions; this sum to be paid bythe inhabitants of that place. " This was thirteen pounds a year morethan Bayley's friends had ever voted for him. To make the matter sure, the General Court required the parish to choose three or five menamong themselves to apportion every man's share of the tax to securethe sixty pounds: and, if any difficulty should occur in getting menamong themselves to perform this duty, they appointed to act, in thatevent, Mr. Batter, Captain Jonathan Corwin, and Captain Price, of theold parish of Salem, to make the rate; and gave ample power to theconstable of the village or the marshal of the county, to enforce thecollection of it, by distress and attachment, if any should neglect orrefuse to pay the sum assessed upon him. To make it still more certainthat Mr. Bayley should get his money, they ordered "that all the rateis to be paid in for the use of the ministry unto two persons chosenby the householders to supply the place of deacons for the time, whoare to reckon with the people, and to deliver the same to the saidminister or to his order. " The arrangement as to the agency of deaconswas "to continue until the Court shall take further order, or thatthere be a church of Christ orderly gathered and approved in thatplace. " This procedure of the Court was a pretty high-handed stretchof power even for those days; and giving the appointment of officers, with the title and character of deacons to mere householders, andwhere there was no church or organized body of professed believers, was in absolute conflict with the whole tenor and spirit of theecclesiastical system then in force and rigidly maintained elsewherethroughout the colony. The Court seems itself to have been alarmed atthe extent to which it had gone in forcing Mr. Bayley upon the peopleof Salem Village, and fell back, in conclusion, upon the followingproviso: "This order shall continue for one year only from the last ofSeptember last past. " The date of the order was the 15th of October, 1679. It had less than a year to run. In fact, the order, after all, before it comes to the end, is diluted into a mere recommendation ofMr. Bayley. "In the mean while, all parties, " it is hoped, will"endeavor an agreement in him or some other meet person for a ministeramong them;" but the General Court takes care to wind up by demanding"five pounds for hearing the case, the whole number of villagersequally to bear their proportion thereof. "

While the power thus incautiously conceded to householders was dulynoted, the apparently formidable action of the Court did not in theleast alarm the opposition, or in the slightest degree abate theirzeal. The householders continued, as before, to manage all affairsrelating to the ministry in general meetings of the inhabitants. Theyproceeded at once to elect their two deacons. "Corporal NathanielIngersoll" was one of them; and he continued to hold the office, inparish and in church, for forty years. 

As no attention was paid to the order of the General Court, so far asit attempted to fasten Mr. Bayley upon the parish; as the church inSalem would not take the responsibility of recommending his ordinationin the face of such an opposition; and as it was out of the questionto think of reconciling or reducing it, Mr. Bayley concluded to retirefrom the conflict and quit the field; and his ministry in the villagecame to an end. As evidence that the heat of this protractedcontroversy had not consumed all just and considerate sentiments inthe minds of the people, I present the substance of a deed found inthe Essex Registry. It will be noticed, that the most conspicuous ofMr. Bayley's opponents, Nathaniel Putnam, is one of the parties to theinstrument. 

"Thomas Putnam, Sr. , Nathaniel Putnam, Sr. , Thomas Fuller, Sr. , JohnPutnam, Sr. , and Joseph Hutchinson, Sr. Deed of gift to Mr. JamesBayley. Whereas, Mr. James Bayley, minister of the gospel, nowresident of Salem Village, hath been in the exercise of his gifts bypreaching amongst us several years, having had a call thereunto by theinhabitants of the place; and at the said Mr. Bayley's first comingamongst us, we above-named put the said Bayley in possession of asuitable accommodation of land and meadow, for his more comfortablesubsistence amongst us. But the providence of God having so orderedit, that the said Mr. Bayley doth not continue amongst us in the workof the ministry, yet, considering the premises, and as a testimony ofour good affection to the said Mr. Bayley, and as full satisfaction ofall demands of us or any of us, of land relating to the premises, doby these presents fully grant, &c. , to said Bayley" twenty-eight acresof upland, and thirteen acres of meadow in all. The several lots aredescribed in the deed, and constitute a very valuable property. Theinstrument bears date May 6, 1680. Mr. Bayley's residence is indicatedon the map. The land on which it stood belonged to the partcontributed by Nathaniel Putnam, with some acres in front of itcontributed by Joseph Hutchinson. He continued to own and occasionallyoccupy his property in the village for some years after the witchcrafttransactions. He left the ministry, and prepared himself for theprofession of medicine, which he practised in Roxbury. He died on the17th of January, 1707. 

It is not very easy to ascertain from the parish records, or from themass of papers in the State-house files, the precise grounds of theobstinate controversy in reference to him. It is evident that it beganin consequence of some alleged irregularity in the proceedings thatled to his first engagement to preach at the village. There areintimations, that, in the tone and style of his preaching, he did notquite come up to the mark required by some. The objection does notseem to have been against his talents or learning, but, rather, thathe did not take hold with sufficient vehemence, or handle withsufficient zeal and warmth, points then engrossing attention. One ortwo expressions in the papers which proceeded from his opponents seemto hint that he had not the degree of strictness or severity in hisaspect or ways thought necessary in a minister. Papers in the files ofthe County Court bring to light, perhaps, precisely the shape in whichthe charges against him had currency. On the 4th of April, 1679, complaint was made by Thomas and John Putnam, Srs. , Daniel Andrew, andNathaniel Ingersoll, against Henry Kenny "for slandering our minister, Mr. Bayley, by reporting that he doth not perform family duties in hisfamily. " This was an expression then in use for "family prayers. " Oneyoung woman testified as follows: "Being at Mr. Bayley's house threeweeks together, I never heard Mr. Bayley read a chapter, nor expoundon any part of the Scripture, which was a great grief to me. " On theother hand, three men and one woman depose thus: "Having, for a year, some more, some less, since Mr. Bayley's coming to Salem Farms, livedat his house, we testify to our knowledge, that he hath continuallyperformed family duties, morning and evening, unless sickness or someother unavoidable providence hath prevented. " Two of the abovewitnesses depose more specifically as follows: "We testify, --one of usbeing a boarder at Mr. Bayley's house, at times, for two or threeyears, and the other having lived there about a year and aquarter, --that Mr. Bayley did not only constantly perform familyprayers twice a day, except some unusual providence at any timeprevented, but also did sometimes read the Scriptures and otherprofitable books, and also repeat his own sermons in his family thathe preached upon the Lord's Days; always endeavoring to keep goodorder in his family, carrying himself exemplarily therein. " Theevidence against Bayley was afterwards found to be unworthy of credit, and was wholly overborne at the time by unimpeachable testimony in hisfavor. The conclusion seems to be safe, from all the papers andproceedings, that Mr. Bayley was, as the General Court had pronouncedhim, "of a blameless conversation. " A letter from him to his people, relating to the disaffection of some, and expressing a willingness torelinquish his position, if the interests of the society would therebybe promoted, is among the papers. It is creditable to hisunderstanding, temper, and character. 

The opposition to Mr. Bayley laid the train for all the disastrous andterrible scenes that followed. His wife was Mary Carr, of Salisbury. Her family, besides land in that town, owned the large island in theMerrimack, just above Newburyport, called still by their name, andoccupied by their descendants to this day. Mrs. Bayley brought withher to the village a younger sister, Ann, who, when scarcely sixteenyears of age, --on the 25th of November, 1678, --married Sergeant ThomasPutnam. The Carrs were evidently well-educated young women; and thereis every indication that Ann was possessed of qualities which gave hermuch influence in private circles. Her husband was the eldest son ofthe richest man in the village, had the most powerful and extensiveconnections, was a member of the company of troopers, had been in theNarragansett fight, and, as his records show, was a well-educatedperson. Marriage with him brought his wife into the centre of thegreat Putnam family; and, her sister Bayley being the wife of theminister, a powerful combination was secured to his support. Theopposition so obstinately made to his settlement, appearing to hisfriends, as it does to us, so unreasonable, if not perverse, engendered a very bitter resentment, which spread from house to house. Every thing served to aggravate it. The disregard, by the opposition, of the advice of the old church to agree to his ordination, and of thestrong endorsement of him by the General Court; and the failure ofeither of those bodies to take the responsibility of proceeding to hisordination, --made the dissatisfaction and disappointment of hisfriends intense. His connection by marriage with such a wide-spreadinfluence, and the harmony and happiness of social life, made hissettlement so very desirable that his friends could not account forthe resistance made to it. His amiable character, which had been shownto be proof against slander; and his domestic bereavements in the lossof his wife and three children, --made him dear to his friends. Morethan three to one earnestly, persistently, from year to year, beggedthat he might be ordained; but what was regarded as an unworthyfaction was permitted to succeed in preventing it. All these thingssunk deep into the heart of the wife of Sergeant Thomas Putnam. Shewas a woman of an excitable temperament, and, by her talents, zeal, and personal qualities, wrought all within her influence into thehighest state of exasperation. This must be borne in mind when wereach the details of our story. It is the key to all that followed. 

The friends of Bayley, while they yielded to his determination towithdraw from his disagreeable position, never relinquished the hopeto get him back, but renewed a struggle to that end, whenever avacancy occurred in the village ministry. With that object in view, they were unwise and unjust enough to cherish aversion to every onewho succeeded him, and thus kept alive the fatal elements of division. But it is due to him to say, that he does not appear to have been atall responsible for the course of his friends. Although retaining hisproperty in the village, and often residing there, there is noindication that he had a hand in subsequent proceedings, or was in theslightest degree connected with the troubles that afterwards arose. Arts were used to inveigle him into the witchcraft prosecutions: hisresentments, if he had any, were invoked; but in vain. He resistedattempts, which were made with more effect upon one of his successors, to rouse his passions against parties accused. He kept himself freefrom the whole affair. His name nowhere appears as complainant, witness, or actor in any shape. He was, so far as the evidence goes, apeaceable, prudent, kind, and good man; and if the people of SalemVillage had been wise enough, or been permitted, to settle him, theworld might never have known that such a place existed. 

George Burroughs, in November, 1680, was engaged to preach at SalemVillage. He is supposed to have been born in Scituate; but his originis as uncertain as his history was sad, and his end tragical. He was agraduate of Harvard College in the class of 1670. What little is knownof him shows that he was a man of ability and integrity. Papers onfile in the State House prove, that, in the district of Maine, wherehe lived and preached before and after his settlement at the village, he was regarded with confidence by his neighbors, and looked up to asa friend and counsellor. Certain incidents are related, which provethat he was self-denying, generous, and public-spirited, laboring inhumility and with zeal in the midst of great privations, sharing theexposures of his people to Indian violence, and experiencing all thesufferings of an unprotected outpost. In 1676, while preaching atCasco, --now Portland, --the entire settlement was broken up by anIndian assault. Thirty-two of the inhabitants were killed or carriedinto captivity. Mr. Burroughs escaped to an island in the bay, fromwhich he was rescued by timely aid from the mainland. He wrote anaccount of the catastrophe, communicated by Brian Pendleton to theGovernor and Council at Boston. In 1683 he was again at Casco; and, again driven off by the Indians in 1690, transferred his labors toWells. A grant of one hundred and fifty acres of land was made to him, included in the site of the present city of Portland. As populationbegan to thicken near the spot, the town applied to him to relinquisha part of it, other lands to be given him in exchange. In theiraccount of the transaction, they state, that, in answer to theirapplication, Mr. Burroughs said they were welcome to it; that hefreely gave it back, "not desiring any land anywhere else, nor anything else in consideration thereof. "

In a vote passed at a meeting of Salem Village parish, Feb. 10, 1681, it was agreed that Mr. Burroughs should receive £93. 6_s. _ 8_d. _ perannum for three years, and £60 per annum afterwards. I suppose that hehad no money or property of any kind. The parsonage was out of repair;and the larger sum for the first three years, amounting to £100, inthree instalments, was to be given him as an outfit in housekeeping. Immediately upon coming to the village to reside, he encountered thehostility of those persons who, as the special friends of Mr. Bayley, allowed their prejudices to be concentrated upon his innocentsuccessor. The unhappy animosities arising from this source entirelydemoralized the Society, and, besides making it otherwise veryuncomfortable to a minister, led to a neglect and derangement of allfinancial affairs. In September, 1681, Mr. Burroughs's wife died, andhe had to run in debt for her funeral expenses. Rates were notcollected, and his salary was in arrears. In making the contract withthe parish, he had taken care to add, at the end of the articles, these words, "All is to be understood so long as I have gospelencouragement. " It is not improbable that there was a lack of sympathybetween him and the ministers in this part of the country. Heconcluded that no benefit would accrue from calling a council to putthings into order; and, as he was in despair of remedying the evilsthat had become fastened upon the village, he concluded to give up theidea of getting a settlement of his accounts, abandoned his claimsaltogether, and removed from the village. 

At the April term of Court in Ipswich, 1683, a committee of the parishpetitioned for relief, stating that Mr. Burroughs had left them, andthat they had been without services in their meeting-house for foursabbaths. They pray the Court, that "they be pleased to write to Mr. Burroughs, requiring him to attend an orderly hearing and clearing upthe case, " and "to come to account" with them. The Court accordinglydirected a meeting of the inhabitants to be held, and wrote to Mr. Burroughs to attend it. When the day came, the Court sent a letter tobe read at the meeting, directing the parties to "reckon, " and settletheir accounts. What transpired at this curious meeting is best givenby presenting the documents on file in a case that went into Court. They show the proceedings that interrupted the "reckoning" at themeeting in a most extraordinary manner:--

 [COUNTY COURT, June, 1683. --Lieutenant John Putnam _versus_ Mr. George Burroughs. Action of debt for two gallons of Canary wine, and cloth, &c. , bought of Mr. Gedney on John Putnam's account, for the funeral of Mrs. Burroughs. ]

 "_Deposition_. 

 "We, whose names are underwritten, testify and say, that at a public meeting of the people of Salem Farms, April 24, 1683, we heard a letter read, which letter was sent from the Court. After the said letter was read, Mr. Burroughs came in. After the said Burroughs had been a while in, he asked 'whether they took up with the advice of the Court, given in the letter, or whether they rejected it. ' The moderator made answer, 'Yes, we take up with it;' and not a man contradicted it to any of our hearing. After this was passed, was a discourse of settling accounts between the said Burroughs and the inhabitants, and issuing things in peace, and parting in love, as they came together in love. Further, we say that the second, third, and fourth days of the following week were agreed upon by Mr. Burroughs and the people to be the days for every man to come in and to reckon with the said Burroughs; and so they adjourned the meeting to the last of the aforesaid three days, in the afternoon, then to make up the whole account in public. 

 "We further testify and say, that, May the second, 1683, Mr. Burroughs and the inhabitants met at the meeting-house to make up accounts in public, according to their agreement the meeting before; and, just as the said Burroughs began to give in his accounts, the marshal came in, and, after a while, went up to John Putnam, Sr. , and whispered to him, and said Putnam said to him, 'You know what you have to do: do your office. ' Then the marshal came to Mr. Burroughs, and said, 'Sir, I have a writing to read to you. ' Then he read the attachment, and demanded goods. Mr. Burroughs answered, 'that he had no goods to show, and that he was now reckoning with the inhabitants, for we know not yet who is in debt, but there was his body. ' As we were ready to go out of the meeting-house, Mr. Burroughs said, 'Well, what will you do with me?' Then the marshal went to John Putnam, Sr. , and said to him, 'What shall I do?' The said Putnam replied, 'You know your business. ' And then the said Putnam went to his brother, Thomas Putnam, and pulled him by the coat; and they went out of the house together, and presently came in again. Then said John Putnam, 'Marshal, take your prisoner, and have him up to the ordinary, --that is a public house, --and secure him till the morning. '

 (Signed) "NATHANIEL INGERSOLL, aged about fifty. SAMUEL SIBLEY, aged about twenty-four. 

 "To the first of these, I, John Putnam, Jr. , testify, being at the meeting. "

The above document illustrates the general position of the Putnamfamily through all the troubles of the Salem Village parish. Thomasand John were the heads of two of its branches, and participated inthe proceedings against Burroughs. Nathaniel generally was on theother side in the course of the various controversies which finallyculminated in the witchcraft delusion. His son, John Putnam, Jr. , onthis occasion, was a witness friendly to Mr. Burroughs. NathanielIngersoll does not appear to have been a partisan on either side. Hissympathies, generally, were with the friends of Bayley; but, on thisoccasion, his sense of justice led him to take the lead in behalf ofBurroughs. Other depositions are as follows:--

 "THE TESTIMONY OF THOMAS HAYNES, aged thirty-two years or thereabouts. --Testifieth and saith, that, at a meeting of the inhabitants of Salem Farms, May the second, 1683, after the marshal had read John Putnam's attachment to Mr. Burroughs, then Mr. Burroughs asked Putnam 'what money it was he attached him for. ' John Putnam answered, 'For five pounds and odd money at Shippen's at Boston, and for thirteen shillings at his father Gedney's, and for twenty-four shillings at Mrs. Darby's;' that then Nathaniel Ingersoll stood up, and said, 'Lieutenant, I wonder that you attach Mr. Burroughs for the money at Darby's and your father Gedney's, when, to my knowledge, you and Mr. Burroughs have reckoned and balanced accounts two or three times since, as you say, it was due, and you never made any mention of it when you reckoned with Mr. Burroughs. ' John Putnam answered, 'It is true, and I own it. ' Samuel Sibley, aged twenty-four years or thereabouts, testifieth to all above written. "

 "THE TESTIMONY OF NATHANIEL INGERSOLL, _aged, &c. _--Testifieth, that I heard Mr. Burroughs ask Lieutenant John Putnam to give him a bill to Mr. Shippen. The said Putnam asked the said Burroughs how much he would take up at Mr. Shippen's. Mr. Burroughs said it might be five pounds; but, after the said Burroughs had considered a little, he said to the said Putnam, 'It may be it might come to more:' therefore he would have him give him a bill to the value of five or six pounds, --when Putnam answered, it was all one to him. Then the said Putnam went and writ it, and read it to Mr. Burroughs, and said to him that it should go for part of the £33. 6_s. _ 8_d. _ for which he had given a bill to him in behalf of the inhabitants. I, Hannah Ingersoll, aged forty-six years or thereabouts, testify the same. "

It seems by the foregoing, that Mr. Burroughs had presented a bill, ofthe amount just mentioned, to John Putnam, who, as chairman of thecommittee the preceding year, represented the inhabitants; and it wasdeliberately and formally agreed, that the sum borrowed of Putnam byBurroughs should "go for part of it. " The records of the parish show, that, on the 24th of May, --three weeks after this meeting "forreckoning, "--a vote was passed to raise, by a rate, "fifteen poundsfor Mr. Burroughs for the last quarter of a year he preached with us. "At a meeting in December of the same year, a rate was ordered, to paythe debts of the parish, amounting to £52. 1_s. _ 1_d. _ On the 22d ofthe ensuing February, the parish voted to raise "fifteen pounds forMr. Burroughs. " The record of a meeting in April, 1684, contains anorder, left on the book, with Mr. Burroughs's proper signature, authorizing Lieutenant Thomas Putnam to receive of the committee "whatis due to me from the inhabitants of Salem Farms. " Thus it is evident, that, at the very day when the ruthless proceedings above describedtook place, a considerable balance was due to Mr. Burroughs, after allclaims from all quarters had been "reckoned. " The return of themarshal, made to the Court, was as follows:--

 "I have attached the body of George Burroughs he tendered to me, --for he said he had no pay, --and taken bonds to the value of fourteen pounds money, and read this to him. 

 Per me, HENRY SKERRY, _Marshal_. "

The bond is as follows. I give the names of the signers. The personswho interposed to rescue a persecuted man from unjust imprisonmentdeserve to be held in honored remembrance. 

 "We whose names are underwritten do bind ourselves jointly and severally to Henry Skerry, Marshal of Salem, our heirs, executors, and administrators, in the sum of fourteen pounds money, that George Burroughs shall appear at the next court at Salem, to answer to Lieutenant John Putnam, according to the summons of this attachment, and to abide the order of the court therein, and not to depart without license; as witness our hands this 2d of May, 1683. 

 "GEORGE BURROUGHS. NATHANIEL INGERSOLL. JOHN BUXTON. THOMAS HAYNES. SAMUEL SIBLEY. WILLIAM SIBLEY. WILLIAM IRELAND, JR. "

The case was withdrawn, and Burroughs was glad to get away. Hepreferred the Indians at Casco Bay to the people here. When weconsider, that a committee of the parish petitioned the Court to havesuch a meeting of the inhabitants; that it was held, by an order ofCourt, in compliance with said petition; that Burroughs came back tothe village to attend it; that the meeting agreed, in answer to aninquiry from him to that effect, to conform to the order of the Courtin making it the occasion of a full and final "reckoning" betweenthem; that they spent two days and a half in bringing in and siftingall claims on either side; and that, when, at the time agreedupon, --the afternoon of the third day, --the whole body of theinhabitants had come together to ratify and give effect to the"reckoning, " the marshal came in with a writ, and, evidently inviolation of his feelings, was forced by John Putnam to arrestBurroughs, thereby breaking up the proceedings asked for by the parishand ordered by the Court, for a debt which he did not owe, --it must beallowed, that it was one of the most audacious and abominable outragesever committed. 

The scene presented in these documents is perhaps as vivid, and bringsthe actual life before us as strikingly, as any thing that has comedown to us from that day. We can see, as though we were looking in atthe door, the spectacle presented in the old meeting-house: thefarmers gathered from their remote and widely scattered plantations, some possibly coming in travelling family-vehicles, --although it isquite uncertain whether there were any at that time among thefarmers; some in companies on farm-carts; many on foot; but thegreater number on horseback, in their picturesque costume of homespunor moose-skin, with cowl-shaped hoods, or hats with a brim, narrow infront, but broad and slouching behind, hanging over the shoulders. Every man was belted and sworded. They did not wear weapons merely forshow. There was half a score of men in that assembly who were in theNarragansett fight; and some bore on their persons scars from thatbloody scene of desperate heroism. Every man, it is probable, had cometo the meeting with his firelock on his shoulder, to defend himselfand companions against Indians lurking in the thick woods throughwhich they had to pass. Their countenances bespoke the passions towhich they had been wrought up by their fierce parishquarrels, --rugged, severe, and earnest. We can see the grim bearing ofthe cavalry lieutenant, John Putnam, and of his elder brother andpredecessor in commission. Marshal Skerry, with his badges of office, is reluctant to execute its functions upon a persecuted and pennilessminister; but, in accordance with the stern demands of the inexorableprosecutors, is faithful still to his painful duty. The minister isthe central object in the picture, --a small, dark-complexioned man, the amazed but calm and patient victim of an animosity in which he hadno part, and for which he was in no wise responsible. The unresistingdignity of his bearing is quite observable. "We are now reckoning; weknow not yet who is in debt. I have no pay; but here is my body. "Perhaps, in that unconspicuous frame, and through that humble garb, the sinewy nerves and muscles of steel, the compact and concentratedforces, that were the marvel of his times, and finally cost him hislife, were apparent in his movements and attitudes. It may be, thatthe sufferings and exposures of his previous life had left upon hisswarthy features a stamp of care and melancholy, foreshadowing thegreater wrongs and trials in store for him. But the chief figure inthe group is the just man who rose and rebuked the harsh andreprehensible procedure of the powerful landholder, neighbor andfriend though he was. The manner in which the arbitrary trooper bowedto the rebuke, if it does not mitigate our resentment of his conduct, illustrates the extraordinary influence of Nathaniel Ingersoll'scharacter, and demonstrates the deference in which all men held him. 

There are in this affair other points worthy of notice, as showing theeffects of their bitter feuds in rendering them insensible to everyappeal of charity or humanity. Their minds had become so soured, andtheir sense of what was right so impaired, that they neglected andrefused to fulfil their most ordinary obligations to each other, andto themselves as a society. Rates were not collected, and contractswere not complied with. The minister and his family were left withoutthe necessaries of life. They were compelled to borrow even theirclothing, articles of which constituted a part of the debt for whichhe was arrested in such a public and unfeeling manner. A young womantestifies that she lived with Mr. Burroughs about two years, and says:"My mistress did tell me that she had some serge of John Putnam'swife, to make Mary a coat; and also some fustian of his wife, to makemy mistress a pair of sleeves. " The principal items in the accountwere for articles required at the death of his wife, by the usages ofthat day on funeral occasions. Surely it was an outrage upon humannature to spring a suit at law and have a writ served on him, and takehim as a prisoner, on such an occasion, under such circumstances, onan alleged debt incurred by such a bereavement, when poverty andnecessity had left him no alternative. The whole procedure receivesthe stamp, not only of cruelty, but of infamy, from the fact, whichNathaniel Ingersoll compelled Putnam to acknowledge before the wholecongregation, that the account had been settled and the debt paid longbefore. 

John Putnam, although a hard and stern man, had many traits of dignityand respectability in his character. That he could have done thisthing, in this way, proves the extent to which prejudice and passionmay carry one, particularly where party spirit consumes individualreason and conscience. At this point it is well to consider a piece oftestimony brought against Burroughs nine years afterwards. There wasno propriety or sense in giving it when it was adduced. It was, intruth, an outrage to have introduced such testimony in a case whereBurroughs was on trial for witchcraft; and it was allowed, only toprejudice and mislead the minds of a jury and of the public. But it isproper to be taken into view, in forming a just estimate, with animpartial aim, of his general character. The document is found in apromiscuous bundle of witchcraft papers. 

 "THE DEPOSITION OF JOHN PUTNAM AND REBECCA HIS WIFE. --Testifieth and saith, that, in the year 1680, Mr. Burroughs lived in our house nine months. There being a great difference betwixt said Burroughs and his wife, the difference was so great that they did desire us, the deponents, to come into their room to hear their difference. The controversy that was betwixt them was, that the aforesaid Burroughs did require his wife to give him a written covenant, under her hand and seal, that she would never reveal his secrets. Our answer was, that they had once made a covenant we did conceive did bind each other to keep their lawful secrets. And further saith, that, all the time that said Burroughs did live at our house, he was a very harsh and sharp man to his wife; notwithstanding, to our observation, she was a very good and dutiful wife to him. "

The first observation that occurs in examining this piece of testimonyis, that the answer made by Putnam and his wife was excellent, and, like every thing from him, shows that he was a man of strong commonsense, and had a forcible and effectual way of expressing himself. Thenext thing to be considered is, that Mr. Burroughs probablydiscovered, soon after coming to the village, into what a hornets'nest he had got, --every one tattling about and backbiting each other. His innocent and unsuspicious wife may have indulged a little in whatis considered the amiable proclivity of her sex, and have let fall, intea-table talk, what cavillers and mischief-makers were on hand totake up; and he may have found it both necessary and difficult toteach her caution and reserve. He saw, more perhaps than she did, thedanger of getting involved in the personal acrimonies with which thewhole community was poisoned. Her unguarded carelessness might getherself and him into trouble, and vitally impair their happiness andhis usefulness. The only other point to be remarked upon is thegeneral charge against Mr. Burroughs's temper and disposition. It maybe that he became so disgusted with the state of things as to haveshown some acerbity in his manners, but such a supposition is not inharmony with what little is known of him from other sources; and JohnPutnam's conduct at the meeting described proves that his mind wasfully perverted, and bereft as it were of all moral rectitude ofjudgment, in reference to Mr. Burroughs. We must part with Mr. Burroughs for the present. We shall meet him again, where the powersof malignity will be more shamelessly let loose upon him, and prevailto his destruction. 

He was succeeded in the ministry at Salem Village by a character of atotally different class. Deodat Lawson is first heard of in thiscountry, according to Mr. Savage, at Martha's Vineyard in 1671. Hetook the freeman's oath at Boston in 1680, and continued to have hisresidence there. It was not until after much negotiation andconsiderable importunity, that he was prevailed upon to enter into anengagement to preach at the Village. He began his ministry early in1684, as appears by the parish record of a meeting Feb. 22, 1684:"Voted that Joseph Herrick, Jonathan Putnam, and Goodman Cloyse aredesired to take care for to get a boat for the removing of Mr. Lawson's goods. " Votes, about this time, were passed to repair theparsonage, and the fences around the ministry land; thus puttingthings in readiness to receive him. It does not appear that he becameparticularly entangled in the conflicts which had so long disturbedthe Village, although, while the mother-church signified its readinessto approve of his ordination, and some movement was made in theVillage to that end, it was found impossible to bring the hostileparties sufficiently into co-operation to allow of any thing beingdefinitely accomplished. Fortunately for Mr. Lawson, the spirit ofstrife found other objects upon which to expend its energies for thetime being. Some persons brought forward complaints, that the recordsof the parish had not been correctly kept (this was before SergeantThomas Putnam had been charged with that trust); that votes which hadpassed in "Mr. Bayley's days" and in "Mr. Burroughs's days" had notbeen truly recorded, or recorded at all; and that what had never beenpassed had been entered as votes. A great agitation arose on thissubject, and many meetings were held. Some demanded that the spuriousvotes should be expunged; others, that the omitted votes should beinserted. Then there was an excited disputation about the ministrylands, and the validity or sufficiency of their title to them. JosephHoulton had given them; but he had nothing to do with raising thequestion, and did all he could to suppress it. Some person haddiscovered that William Haynes, to whom Houlton had succeeded by theright of his wife, had omitted to get his deed of purchase recorded, and the original could not be found. Disputes also arose about the useof the grounds around the meeting-house. These, added to the conflictswith the "Topsfield men, " and matters not fully adjusted with the townof Salem, created and kept up a violent fermentation, in which allwere miscellaneously involved. In the midst of this confusion, thematter of ordaining Mr. Lawson was put into the warrant for a meetingto be held on the 10th of December, 1686. But it was found impossibleto recall the people from their divisions, and no favorable actioncould be had. 

At length, all attempts to settle their difficulties among themselveswere abandoned; and they called for help from outside. At a legallywarned meeting on the 17th of January, 1687, the inhabitants madechoice of "Captain John Putnam" (he had been promoted in the militaryline since the affair in the meeting-house with Mr. Burroughs), "Lieutenant Jonathan Walcot, Ensign Thomas Flint, and Corporal JosephHerrick, for to transact with Joseph Hutchinson, Job Swinnerton, Joseph Porter, and Daniel Andrew about their grievances relating tothe public affairs of this place; and, if they cannot agree amongthemselves, that then they shall refer their differences to theHonored Major Gedney and John Hathorne, Esqs. , and to the reverendelders of the Salem Church, for a full determination of thosedifferences. " Of course, it was impossible to settle the matter amongthemselves, and the referees were called in. William Brown, Jr. , Esq. , was added to them. They were all of the old town, and men of thehighest consideration. Their judgment in the case is a well-drawn andinteresting document, and shows the view which near neighbors took ofthe distractions in the village. The following passage will exhibitthe purport and spirit of it:--

 "_Loving Brethren, Friends and Neighbors_, --Upon serious consideration of, and mature deliberation upon, what hath been offered to us about your calling and transacting in order to the settling and ordaining the Rev. Mr. Deodat Lawson, and the grievances offered by some to obstruct and impede that proceeding, our sense of the matter is this, --first, that the affair of calling and transacting in order to the settling and ordaining the Reverend Mr. Lawson hath not been so inoffensively managed as might have been, --at least, not in all the parts and passages of it; second, that the grievances offered by some amongst you are not in themselves of sufficient weight to obstruct so great a work, and that they have not been improved so peaceably and orderly as Christian prudence and self-denial doth direct; third, to our grief, we observe such uncharitable expressions and uncomely reflections tossed to and fro as look like the effects of settled prejudice and resolved animosity, though we are much rather willing to account them the product of weakness than wilfulness: however, we must needs say, that, come whence they will, they have a tendency to make such a gap as we fear, if not timely prevented, will let out peace and order, and let in confusion and every evil work. "

They then proceed to give some good advice to "prevent contention andtrouble for the future, that it may not devour for ever, and that, ifthe Lord please, you may be happier henceforth than to make oneanother miserable; and not make your place uncomfortable to yourpresent, and undesirable to any other, minister, and the ministryitself in a great measure unprofitable: and that you may not bringimpositions on yourselves by convincing all about you that you cannot, or will not, use your liberty as becomes the gospel. " Their advice is, "that you desist, at present, from urging the ordination of the Rev. Mr. Lawson, till your spirits are better quieted and composed. " Theygive some judicious suggestions about various matters that had beenthe occasion of difficulty among them, especially to help them gettheir records put into good shape, and kept so for the future; andwind up in the following excellent, and in some of the clauses ratheremphatic and pithy, expressions:--

 "Finally, we think peace cheap, if it may be procured by complying with the aforementioned particulars, which are few, fair, and easy; and that they will hardly pass for lovers of peace, truth, ministry, and order, in the day of the Lord, that shall so lean to their own understanding and will that they shall refuse such easy methods for the obtaining of them. And, if peace and agreement amongst you be once comfortably obtained, we advise you with all convenient speed to go on with your intended ordination; and so we shall follow our advice with our prayers. But, if our advice be rejected, we wish you better, and hearts to follow it; and only add, if you will unreasonably trouble yourselves, we pray you not any further to trouble us. We leave all to the blessing of God, the wonderful Counsellor, and your own serious consideration: praying you to read and consider the whole, and then act as God shall direct you. Farewell. "

 [Salem, Feb. 14, 1687. Signed by the five referees, --John Higginson and Nicholas Noyes (the elders of the old church), and the three gentlemen before named. ]

At a meeting of the inhabitants of the Village on the 18th ofFebruary, it was voted that "we do accept of and embrace the advice ofthe honored and reverend gentlemen of Salem, sent to us under theirhands, and order that it shall be entered on our book of records. " Butthey took care further to vote, that they accepted it "in general, andnot in parts. " In accordance with the advice of the referees, theybrought up, considered anew, and put to question, every entry in theirpast records about the genuineness and validity of which any divisionof opinion existed. Some entries that had been complained of and givenoffence as incorrect were voted out, and others were confirmed bybeing adopted on a new vote. A new book of records was prepared, toconform to these decisions, which, having been submitted forexamination to leading persons, appointed for the purpose at a legalmeeting representing both parties, and approved by them, was adoptedand sanctioned at a subsequent meeting also called for the purpose. 

In accordance with the same advice "that the old book of records bekept in being, " it was ordered by the meeting to leave the votes thathad, by the foregoing proceedings, been rendered null and void, to"lie in the old book of records as they are. " From the new book ofrecords we learn that "some votes are left out that passed in Mr. Bayley's days, and some that passed in Mr. Burroughs's days, "particularly all the votes but one that passed at a meeting held onthe fifth day of June, 1683, the very time that Mr. Burroughs wasunder bonds in the action of debt brought by John Putnam. The newrecord specifies some few, but not all, of the votes that wererescinded because it was adjudged that they had not rightfully passed, or been correctly stated. Unfortunately, the old book, after all, hasnot been "kept in being;" and much that would have exhibited morefully and clearly the unhappy early history of the parish is for everlost. If the records that have been suffered to remain present thepicture I have endeavored faithfully to draw, how much darker mighthave been its shades had we been permitted to behold what the partiesconcerned concurred in thinking too bad to be left to view!

The attempt to expunge records is always indefensible, besides beingin itself irrational and absurd. It may cover up the details of wrongand folly; but it leaves an unlimited range to the most unfriendlyconjecture. We are compelled to imagine what we ought to be allowed toknow; and, in many particulars, our fancies may be worse than thefacts. But later times, and public bodies of greater pretensions than"the inhabitants of Salem Village, " have attempted, and succeeded inperpetrating, this outrage upon history. In trying to conceal theirerrors, men have sometimes destroyed the means of their vindication. This may be the case with the story that is to be told of "SalemWitchcraft. " It has been the case in reference to wider fields ofhistory. The Parliamentary journals and other public records of theperiod of the Commonwealth and the Protectorate were suppressed by theinfatuated stupidity of the Government of the Restoration. Theyfoolishly imagined that they were hiding the shame, while they wereobscuring the glory, of their country. Every Englishman, everyintelligent man, now knows, that, during that very period, all thathas made England great was done. The seeds of her naval and maritimeprosperity were planted: and she was pushed at once by wise measuresof policy, internal and external; by legislation developing herresources and invigorating the power of her people; by a decisive andcomprehensive diplomacy that commanded the respect of foreign courts, and secured to her a controlling influence upon the traffic of theworld; by developments of her military genius under the greatest ofall the great generals of modern times; and by naval achievements thatsnatched into her hands the balancing trident of the seas, --to theplace she still holds (how much longer she may hold it remains to beseen) as the leading power of the world. If she has to relinquish thatposition, it will only be to a power that is true to the spirit, andis not ashamed of the name, of a republic. The nation that fullydevelops the policy which pervaded the records of the EnglishCommonwealth will be the leader of the world. The suppression of thoserecords has not suppressed the spirit of popular liberty, or theprogress of mankind in the path of reform, freedom, equal rights, anda true civilization. It has only cast a shadow, which can never whollybe dispelled, over what otherwise would have been the brightest pagein the annals of a great people. We depend for our knowledge of thesteps by which England then made a most wonderful stride to prosperityand power, not upon official and authoritative records, but upon thedesultory and sometimes merely gossiping memoirs of particularpersons, and such other miscellaneous materials as can be picked up. The only consequence of an attempt to extinguish the memory ofrepublicans, radicals, reformers, and regicides has been, that thehistory of England's true glory can never be adequately written. 

The referees used the following language touching the point of theordination of Mr. Lawson: "If more than a mere major part should notconsent to it, we should be loath to advise our brethren to proceed. "This, in connection with the other sentence I have quoted from theircommunication recommending them "to desist at present" from urging it, was fatal to the immediate movement in his favor; and, not seeing anyprospect of their "spirits becoming better quieted and composed, " andweary of the attempt to bring them to any comfortable degree ofunanimity, Mr. Lawson threw up his connection with them, and removedback to Boston. We shall meet him again; but it is well to despatch atthis point what is to be said of his character and history. 

It is evident that Deodat Lawson had received the best education ofhis day. It is not easy to account for his not having left a moredistinguished mark in Old or New England. He had much learning andgreat talents. Of his power in getting up pulpit performances in thehighest style of eloquence, of which that period afforded remarkablespecimens, I shall have occasion to speak. Among his otherattainments, he was, what cannot be said of learned and professionalmen generally now any more than then, an admirable penman. The villageparish adopted the practice at the beginning, when paying the salariesof its ministers from time to time, instead of taking receipts ondetached and loose pieces of paper, of having them write them out intheir own hand on the pages of the record-book, with their signatures. It is a luxury, in looking over the old volume, to come upon thereceipts of Deodat Lawson, in his plain, round hand. A specimen isgiven among the autographs. His chirography is easy, free, graceful, clear, and clean. It unites with wonderful taste the highest degreesof simplicity and ornament. Each style is used, and both are blended, as occasion required. During his ministry, the trouble about the oldrecord-book occurred. The first four pages of the new book are in hishandwriting. The ink has somewhat faded; the paper has becomediscolored, and, around the margins and at the bottom of the leaves, lamentably worn and broken. The first page exhibits Lawson'spenmanship in its various styles. It is artistically executed inseveral sizes of letters, appropriate to the position of the clausesand the import and weight of the matter. In each there is an elegantcombination of ornament and simplicity. His chirography was often hadin requisition; and papers, evidently from his pen, are on file invarious cases, occurring in court at the time, in which his friendswere interested. 

The first four ministers of the village parish were excellent penmen. Bayley's hand is more like the modern style than the rest. Burroughs'sis as legible as print, uniform in its character, open and upright. The specimen among the autographs is from the record referred to atthe top of page 262. As it was written at the bottom of a page in therecord-book, where there was hardly sufficient room, it had to be in aslanting line. I give it just as it there appears. Parris wrote threedifferent hands, all perfectly easy to read. The larger kind was usedwhen signing his name to important papers, or in brief entries ofrecord. The specimen I give is from a receipt in the parish-book, which Thomas Putnam, as clerk, made oath in court, that Parris wroteand signed in his presence. His notes of examinations of personscharged with witchcraft by the committing magistrate, many of whichare preserved, are in his smallest hand, very minute, but alwayslegible. In his church-records he uses sometimes a medium hand, andsometimes the smallest. The autographs of Townsend Bishop and ThomasPutnam show the handwriting that seems to have prevailed amongwell-educated people in England at the time of the first settlement ofthis country. There was often a profusion of flourishes that obscuredthe letters. The initial capitals were quite complicated and verycurious. The signature of Thomas Putnam, Jr. , exhibits his excellenthandwriting. 

[Illustration]

[Illustration]

I have adduced these facts and given these illustrations to show, that, in this branch of education, --the value and desirableness ofwhich cannot be overrated, --it is at least an open question, whetherwe have much ground to boast of being in advance of the firstgenerations of our ancestors in America. The early ministers of theSalem Village parish certainly compare, in this particular, favorablywith ministers and professional men, and recording officers generallyin public bodies of all kinds, in later times. 

Sergeant Thomas Putnam did not act as clerk of the parish from April, 1687, to April, 1694. A few entries are made by his hand; but therecord, very meagre and fragmentary, is for the most part made byothers. This is much to be regretted, as the interval covers the veryperiod of our history. His time, probably, was taken up, and his mindwholly engrossed, by an unhappy family difficulty, in which, duringthat period, he was involved. Thomas Putnam Sr. Died, as has beenstated, in 1686. It was thought, by the children of his first wife, that the influence of the second wife had been unduly exercised overhim, in his last years, so as to induce him to make a will giving toher, and her only child by him, Joseph, a very unfair proportion ofhis estate. It was felt by them to be so unjust that they attempted tobreak the will. The management of the case was confided to SergeantThomas Putnam, as the eldest son of the family; and the affair, it maybe supposed, absorbed his thoughts to such a degree as to render itnecessary for him to abandon his services as clerk of the parish. Theattempt to set aside the will failed. The circumstances connected withthe subject disturbed very seriously--perhaps permanently--thehappiness of the whole family, and may have contributed to create themorbid excitement which afterwards was so fearfully displayed by thewife of the younger Thomas. 

While Mr. Lawson was at the village, he lost his wife and daughter. In1690, he was again married, to Deborah Allen. He was settledafterwards over the Second Society in Scituate, --it is singular thatour local histories do not tell us when, but that we get all we knowon the point from a sentence written by the pen on a leaf of one ofthe two folio volumes of John Quick's "Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, "in the possession of a gentleman in this country, Henry M. Dexter, whosays it is evidently Quick's autograph. It is in these words: "For myreverend and dear brother, Mr. Lawson, minister of the gospel, andpastor of the church of Scituate, in the province of Massachusetts inNew England; from the publisher, John Quick, _honoris et amoris ergo_, Aug. 6, 1693. " In 1696, Mr. Lawson went over to England, merely for ashort visit, as his people supposed. They heard from him no more. Henever asked a dismission, or communicated with them in any way. In1698, an ecclesiastical council declared them free to settle anotherminister, which they did in due time. He was, no doubt, alive and inLondon when, in 1704, his famous Salem Village sermon was reprintedthere. But this is the last glimpse we have of him. An inscrutablemystery covers the rest of his history. His manner of leaving theScituate parish shows him to have been an eccentric person, leaves anunfavorable impression of his character, and is as inexplicable as theonly other reference to him that has thus far been found. Calamy, inhis "Continuation of the Account of Ejected Ministers, " published in1727, has a notice of Thomas Lawson, whom he describes as minister ofDenton in the county of Norfolk, educated at Katherine Hall inCambridge, and afterwards chosen "to a fellowship in St. John's. Hewas a man of parts, but had no good utterance. He was the father ofthe unhappy Mr. Deodat Lawson, who came hither from New England. " Withall his abilities, learning, and eloquence, he disappears, after there-publication of his Salem Village sermon in London, in the dark, impenetrable cloud of this expression, "the unhappy Mr. DeodatLawson. " Of the melancholy fate implied in the language of Calamy, Ihave not been able to obtain the slightest information. 

The troubles that covered the whole period, since the beginning of Mr. Bayley's ministry, had led to the neglect and derangement of theentire organization of the Village, and resulted in the loss of whatlittle opportunities for education might otherwise have been provided. So great was this evil regarded, that the old town felt it necessaryto interpose; and we find it voted Jan. 24, 1682, that "LieutenantJohn Putnam is desired, and is hereby empowered, to take care that thelaw relating to the catechising of children and youth be duly attendedat the Village. " He is also "desired to have a diligent care that allthe families do carefully and constantly attend the due education oftheir children and youth according to law. " We cannot but feel thatthe man who was ready to fight the "Topsfield men" in the woods--who, when they asked him, "What, by violence?" answered, with axe in hand, "Ay, by violence, " and who figured in the manner described in thescene with Mr. Burroughs--was a singular person to intrust with thecharge of "catechising the children and youth. " But those were queertimes, and he was a queer character. He had always been achurch-member; and, to the day of his death, church and prayermeetings were more frequently held at his house than in any other. Hewas a rough man, but he was no hypocrite. He was in the front of everyencounter; but he was tolerant, too, of difference of opinion. When, at one time, the contests of the Village were at their height, and twocommittees were raised representing the two conflicting parties, hewas at the head of one, and his eldest son (Jonathan) of the other. Their opposition does not seem to have alienated them. While I havefound it necessary to hold him up, in some of his actions, forcondemnation, there were many good points about him; although he wasnot the sort of man that would be likely, in our times, to be selectedto execute the functions of a Sunday-school teacher. 

During all this period, there was a variety of minor controversiesamong themselves, causing greater or less disturbance. JosephHutchinson, who had given a site out of his homestead-grounds for themeeting-house, had no patience with their perpetual wranglings. Hefenced up his lands around the meeting-house lot, leaving them anentrance on the end towards the road. They went to court about it, andhe was called to account by the usual process of law. The plain, gruffold farmer, who seems all along to have been a man of strong sense anddecided character, filed an answer, which is unsurpassed for bluntnessof expression. It has no language of ceremony, but goes to the pointat once. It has a general interest as showing, to how late a periodthe inhabitants of this neighborhood were exposed to Indian attacks, and what means of defence were resorted to by the Village worshippers. The document manifests the contempt in which he held the complainants, and it was all the satisfaction they got. 

 "Joseph Hutchinson his answer is as followeth:--

 "First, as to the covenant they spoke of, I conceive it is neither known of by me nor them, as will appear by records from the farmer's book. 

 "Second, I conceive they have no cause to complain of me for fencing in my own land; for I am sure I fenced in none of theirs. I wish they would not pull down my fences. I am loath to complain, though I have just cause. 

 "Third, for blocking up the meeting-house, it was they did it, and not I, in the time of the Indian wars; and they made Salem pay for it. I wish they would bring me my rocks they took to do it with; for I want them to make fence with. 

 "Thus, hoping this honored Court will see that there was no just cause to complain against me, and their cause will appear unjust in that they would in an unjust way take away my land, I trust I shall have relief; so I rest, your Honor's servant, JOSEPH HUTCHINSON. "

 [Nov. 27, 1686. ]

The next minister of Salem Village brought matters to a crisis. SamuelParris is stated to have been a son of Thomas Parris, of London, andwas born in 1653. He was, for a time, a member of Harvard College, butdid not finish the academic course, being drawn to a commercial life. He was engaged in the West-India business, and probably lived atBarbadoes. After a while, he abandoned commerce, and prepared himselffor the ministry. There was at this time, and long subsequently, avery particular mercantile connection between Salem and Barbadoes. Theformer husband of the wife of Thomas Putnam, Sr. , --NathanielVeren, --as has been stated, had property in that island, and was moreor less acquainted with its people. Perhaps it was through thischannel that the thoughts of the people of the Village were turnedtowards Mr. Parris. From a deposition made by him a few yearsafterwards in a suit at law between him and his parishioners, we learnsome interesting facts relating to the negotiations that led to hissettlement. 

It appears from his statement that a committee, consisting of "CaptainJohn Putnam, Mr. Joshua Rea, Sr. , and Francis Nurse, " was appointed, on the 15th of November, 1688, to treat with him "about takingministerial office. " On the 25th of November, "after the services inthe afternoon, the audience was stayed, and, by a general vote, requested Mr. Parris to take office. " He hung back for a while, andexercised the skill and adroitness acquired in his mercantile life inmaking as sharp a bargain as he could. 

At that time, there appeared to be a degree of harmony among thepeople, such as they had never known before. There was a dispositionon all sides to come together, and avail themselves of the occasionof settling a new minister, to bury their past animosities, andforget their grievances; and there is every reason to believe, if Mr. Parris had promptly closed with their terms, he might have enjoyed apeaceful ministry, and a happy oblivion have covered for ever his nameand the history of the village. But he withheld response to the call. The people were impatient, and felt that the golden opportunity mightbe lost, and the old feuds revive. On the 10th of December, anothercommittee was raised, consisting of Lieutenant Nathaniel Putnam, Sergeant Fuller, Mr. Joshua Rea, Sr. , and Sergeant Ingersoll, as"messengers, to know whether Mr. Parris would accept of office. " Hisanswer was, "the work was weighty; they should know in due time. " Theywere thus kept in suspense during the whole winter, getting no replyfrom him. On the 29th of April, 1689, "Deacons Nathaniel Ingersoll andEdward Putnam, Daniel Rea, Thomas Fuller, Jr. , and John Tarbell, cameto Mr. Parris from the meeting-house, " where there had been a generalmeeting of the inhabitants, and said, "Being the aged men had had thematter of Mr. Parris's settlement so long in hand, and effectednothing, they were desirous to try what the younger could do. " DeaconIngersoll was about fifty-five years of age; but his spirit andcharacter kept him in sympathy with the progressive impulses ofyounger men. Deacon Putnam was thirty-four years of age. Daniel Reawas the son of Joshua; Thomas Fuller, Jr. , the son of Sergeant Fuller;and John Tarbell, the son-in-law of Francis Nurse. 

This is the first appearance, I believe, in our history, of thatnotorious and most pretentious personage who has figured so largely inall our affairs ever since, "Young America. " The sequel shows, that, in this instance at least, no benefit arose from discarding thecaution and experience of years. The "younger men" were determined to"go ahead. " They said they were desirous of a speedy answer. Findingthem in a temper to "finish the thing up, " at any rate, and seeingthat they were ambitious to get the credit of "effecting something, "and, for that end, predisposed to come to his terms, he disclosedthem. They had offered him a salary of sixty pounds per annum, --onethird in money, the rest in provisions, at certain specified rates. Heagreed to accept the call on the foregoing terms, with certainadditional conditions thus described by himself: "First, when moneyshall be more plenteous, the money part to be paid me shallaccordingly be increased. Second, though corn or like provisionsshould arise to a higher price than you have set, yet, for my ownfamily use, I shall have what is needful at the price now stated, andso if it fall lower. Third, the whole sixty pounds to be only from ourinhabitants that are dwelling in our bounds, proportionable to whatlands they have within the same. Fourth, no provision to be brought inwithout first asking whether needed, and myself to make choice ofwhat, unless the person is unable to pay in any sort but one. Fifth, firewood to be given in yearly, freely. Sixth, two men to be chosenyearly to see that due payments be made. Seventh, contributions eachsabbath in papers; and only such as are in papers, and dwelling withinour bounds, to be accounted a part of the sixty pounds. Eighth, as Godshall please to bless the place so as to be able to rise higher thanthe sixty pounds, that then a proportionable increase be made. If Godshall please, for our sins, to diminish the substance of said place, Iwill endeavor accordingly to bear such losses, by proportionableabatements of such as shall reasonably desire it. "

A contribution-box was either handed around by the deacons, before thecongregation was dismissed, or attached permanently near the porch ordoor. Rate-payers would inclose their money in papers, with theirnames, and drop them in. When the box was opened, the sums inclosedwould be entered to their credit on the rate-schedule. There wasalways a considerable number of stated worshippers in the congregationwho lived without the bounds of the village, and often transientvisitors or strangers happened to be at meeting. It was a point thathad not been determined, whether moneys collected from the abovedescriptions of persons should go into the general treasury of theparish, to be used in meeting their contract to pay the minister'ssalary, or be kept as a separate surplus. 

The terms, as thus described by Mr. Parris, show that he had profitedby his experience in trade, and knew how to make a shrewd bargain. Itwas quite certain that a farming community in a new country, withfields continually reclaimed from the wilderness and added toculture, would increase in substance: if so, his annual stipend wouldincrease. If the place should decline, he was to abate the tax ofindividuals, if desired by them personally, so far as he should judgetheir petition to that effect reasonable. If "strangers' money, " orcontributions from "outsiders, " were not to go to make up his sixtypounds, it was quite probable that it would come into his pocket as anextra allowance, or perquisite. 

He says that the committee accepted these terms, and agreed to them, expressing their belief that the people also would. No record appearson the parish-books of the appointment of this committee of the"younger men, " or of the action of the society on their report, or ofany report having been made at that time. In the mean while, Mr. Parris continued to preach and act as the minister of the societyuntil his ordination, near the close of the year. There was a meetingon the 21st of May; but the record consists of but a singleentry, --the appointment of a committee "as overseers for the yearensuing, to take care of our meeting-house and other public charges, and to make return according to law. " The next entry is of a generalmeeting of the inhabitants, on the 18th of June, 1689. The choice ofthe regular standing committee for the year is recorded. Immediatelyfollowing this entry, are these words:--

 "At the same meeting, --the 18th of June, 1689, --it was agreed and voted by general concurrence, that, for Mr. Parris, his encouragement and settlement in the work of the ministry amongst us, we will give him sixty six pounds for his yearly salary, --one-third paid in money, the other two-third parts for provisions, &c. ; and Mr. Parris to find himself firewood, and Mr. Parris to keep the ministry-house in good repair; and that Mr. Parris shall also have the use of the ministry-pasture, and the inhabitants to keep the fence in repair; and that we will keep up our contributions, and our inhabitants to put their money in papers, and this to continue so long as Mr. Parris continues in the work of the ministry amongst us, and all productions to be good and merchantable. And, if it please God to bless the inhabitants, we shall be willing to give more; and to expect, that if God shall diminish the estates of the people, that then Mr. Parris do abate of his salary according to proportion. "

Comparing this record with the account given by Mr. Parris of theeight conditions upon which he agreed, in conference with thecommittee of the "younger" sort, on the 29th of April, to accept thecall of the parish, the difference is not very essential. The matterof firewood was arranged, according to his account, by mutualagreement, they to add six pounds to his salary, and he to find hisown wood. The rates of "the inhabitants" were to be paid "in papers. "The only point of difference, touching this matter, is that the recordis silent about contributions by outsiders and strangers; whereas hesays it was agreed, on the 29th of April, that they should not gotowards making up his salary. The idea of his salary rising with thegrowth and sinking with the decline of the society is expressed in therecord substantially as it is by him, only it is made exact; and, incase of a decline in the means of the people, a corresponding declineis to be in the aggregate of his salary, and not by abatements made byhim in individual cases. The variations are nearly, if not quite, allunimportant in their nature, and such as a regard to mutualconvenience would suggest. Yet there was something in the above recordwhich highly exasperated Mr. Parris. 

In his deposition he states, that, at a meeting held on the 17th ofMay, of which there is no record in the parish book, he was sent forand was present. He says that there was "much agitation" at themeeting. He says that objection was made by the people to two of his"eight" conditions, the fifth and seventh. But there is nothing in therecord of the 18th of June in conflict with what he says was finallyagreed upon, except the disposition that should be made of "strangers'money. " The question then recurs, What was the cause of the "muchagitation" at that meeting? What was it in the language of that recordwhich always so excited Mr. Parris's wrath?

I am inclined to think that the offensive words were those whichrequire "Mr. Parris to keep the ministry house in good repair, " andthat he "shall also have the use of the ministry pasture;" and thiswas not objectionable as involving any expense upon him, but solelybecause the language employed precluded the supposition that theparish had countenanced the idea of ever conveying the parsonage andparsonage lands to him in his own right and absolutely. This was anobject which he evidently had in view from the first, and to which heclung to the last. It is to be feared, that some of the members of the"Young-America" committee, in their heedless and inconsiderateeagerness to "effect" something, to settle Mr. Parris forthwith, andthereby prove how much more competent they were than "the aged men" totransact a weighty business, had encouraged Mr. Parris to think thathis favorite object could be accomplished. Upon a little inquiry, however, they discovered that it could not be done; but that the houseand land were secured by the original deeds of conveyance, and byirreversible agreements and conditions, to the use of the ministry, for the time being and for ever. So far as the committee or any of itsmembers had favored this idea in their conference with Mr. Parris, they had taken a position from which they had to retreat. They hadcompromised themselves and the parish. For this reason, perhaps, theymade no report; and no mention of their agency appears on the records. How far Deacon Ingersoll was misled by his younger associates on thisoccasion, I know not; but he was not a man to break a promise if hecould keep it, no matter how much to his own loss. He recognized hisresponsibility as chairman of the unfortunate committee, and retrievedthe mistake they had made, by giving to Mr. Parris, by deed, a lot ofland adjoining the parsonage property, and in value equal to the wholeof it. The date of that conveyance, immediately after Mr. Parris'sordination, corroborates the conjecture that it was made tocompensate Mr. Parris for the failure of his expectation to getpossession of the ministry property. It ought to have been received byhim as an equivalent, and have soothed his angry disappointment; butit did not. He had indulged the belief, that he had effected a bargainwith the parish, at his settlement, which had made him the owner, infee simple, of the parish property; and when he found that the recordof the terms of his settlement, in the parish-book, absolutelyprecluded that idea, his exasperation was great, and no reparationDeacon Ingersoll or any one else could make was suffered to appeaseit. The following deposition, made in court some years afterwards, gives an account of a scene in the meeting-house after Parris'sordination:--

 "IPSWICH COURT, 1697. --Parris _versus_ Inhabitants of Salem Village. 

 "We the undersigned testify and say, that, a considerable time after Mr. Parris his ordination, there was a meeting of the inhabitants of Salem Village at the usual place of meeting; and the occasion of the meeting was concerning Mr. Parris, and several persons were at that meeting, that had not, before this meeting, joined with the people in calling or agreeing with Mr. Parris; and the said persons desired that those things that concerned Mr. Parris and the people might be read, and accordingly it was. And the entry, that some call a salary, being read, there arose a difference among the people, the occasion of which was finding an entry in the book of the Village records, relating to Mr. Parris his maintenance, which was dated the 18th of June, 1689; and, the entry being read to the people, some replied that they believed that Mr. Parris would not comply with that entry; whereupon one said it was best to send for Mr. Parris to resolve the question. Accordingly, he was sent for. He coming to the people, this entry of the 18th of June, 1689, was read to Mr. Parris. His answer was as follows: 'He never heard or knew any thing of it, neither could or would he take up with it, or any part of it;' and further he said, 'They were knaves and cheaters that entered it. ' And Lieutenant Nathaniel Putnam, being moderator of that meeting, replied to Mr. Parris, and said, 'Sir, then there is only proposals on both sides, and no agreement between you and the people. ' And Mr. Parris answered and said, 'No more, there is not; for I am free from the people, and the people free from me:' and so the meeting broke up. And we further testify, that there hath not been any agreement made with Mr. Parris, that we knew of or ever heard of, --never since. 

 "JOSEPH PORTER. DANIEL ANDREW. JOSEPH PUTNAM. 

 "Sworn in Court, at Ipswich, April 13, 1697, by all three. 

 Attest, STEPHEN SEWALL, _Clerk_. "

The answer which Mr. Parris made to Nathaniel Putnam's inquiryprobably settled the question in the suit then pending, and led to thefinal release of the parish from him. It is hard to find any point ofdifference between his own account of the conditions he himself made, and the record of the parish-book, of sufficient importance to accountfor the storm of passion into which the reading of the latter drovehim, except in the language which I have suggested as the probableoccasion of his wrath. Unfortunately for him, there is evidence quitecorroborative of this suggestion. 

The parish-book has the following record:--

 "At a general meeting of the inhabitants of Salem Village, Oct. 10, 1689, it was agreed and voted, that the vote, in our book of record of 1681, that lays, as some say, an entailment upon our ministry house and land, is hereby made void and of no effect; one man only dissenting. 

 "It was voted and agreed by a general concurrence, that we will give to Mr. Parris our ministry house and barn, and two acres of land next adjoining to the house; and that Mr. Parris take office amongst us, and live and die in the work of the ministry among us; and, if Mr. Parris or his heirs do sell the house and land, that the people may have the first refusal of it, by giving as much as other men will. A committee was chosen to lay out the land, and make a conveyance of the house and land, and to make the conveyance in the name and in the behalf of the inhabitants unto Mr. Parris and his heirs. "

The record of these votes is not signed by the clerk, and there is noevidence that the meeting was legally warned. It does not appear inwhose custody the book then was. But, however the entry got in, itproves that Parris's friends were determined to gratify his all butinsane purpose to get possession of what he ought to have known it wasimpossible for the parish to give, or for him or his heirs to hold. Itwas indeed a miserable commencement of his ministry, to introducesuch a strife with a people who really seem to have had an earnestdesire to receive him with united hearts, and make his settlement andministry the harbinger of a better day. But he alienated many of them, at the very start, by his sharp practice in negotiating about thepecuniary details of his agreement with the parish. When, after alltheir care to prevent it, it became known that somehow or other a votehad got upon the records, conveying to him outright their ministerialproperty, there was great indignation; and a determined effort wasmade to recover what they declared to be "a fraudulent conveying-away"of the property of the society. 

A more violent conflict than any before was let loose upon thatdevoted people. The old passions were rekindled. Men ranged themselvesas the friends and opponents of Mr. Parris in bitter antagonism. Rateswere not collected; the meeting-house went into dilapidation;complaints were made to the County Court; orders were issued tocollect rates, but they were disregarded; and all was confusion, disorder, and contention. 

A church was organized in connection with the village parish, and Mr. Parris ordained on Monday, Nov. 19, 1689. The covenant adopted was the"confession of faith owned and consented unto by the elders andmessengers of the churches assembled at Boston, New England, May 12, 1680. " In the library of the Connecticut Historical Society, there isa manuscript volume of sermons and abstracts of sermons preached byMr. Parris between November, 1689, and May, 1694. It begins with hisordination sermon, which has this prefix: "My poor and weak ordinationsermon, at the embodying of a church at Salem Village on the 19th ofthe ninth month, 1689, the Rev. Mr. Nicholas Noyes embodying of us;who also ordained my most unworthy self pastor, and, together with theRev. Mr. Samuel Phillips and the Rev. Mr. John Hale, imposedhands, --the same Mr. Phillips giving me the right hand of fellowshipwith beautiful loveliness and humility. " The text is from Josh. V. 9:"And the Lord said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away thereproach of Egypt from off you. "

The first entry in the church-records, after the covenant and thenames of the members, is the following: "Nov. 24, 1689. --Sab: day. Brother Nathaniel Ingersoll chosen, by a general vote of the brethren, to officiate in the place of a deacon for a time. "

Mr. Parris commenced his administration by showing that he meant toexercise the disciplinary powers intrusted to him, as pastor of achurch, with a high hand, and without much regard to persons orcircumstances. Ezekiel Cheever had been a member of the mother-churchin Salem twenty years before, was one of the founders of the parishchurch, and appears to have been a worthy and amiable person, occupying and owning the farm of his uncle, Captain Lothrop. On thesudden illness of a member of his family, being "in distress for ahorse, " none of his own being available at the time, he rushed, inhis hurry and alarm, to the stable of a neighbor, took one of hishorses, "without leave or asking of it, " and rode, post haste, for adoctor. One would have thought that an affair of this sort, in such anexigency, might have been left to neighborly explanation oradjustment. But Mr. Parris regarded it as giving a good opportunityfor an exercise of power that would strike the terrors of disciplinehome upon the whole community. About five or six weeks after theoccurrence, Cheever was dealt with in the manner thus described by Mr. Parris, in his church-record, dated "Sab: 30 March, 1690. " He was"called forth to give satisfaction to the offended church, as also thelast sabbath he was called forth for the same purpose; but then hefailed in giving satisfaction, by reason of somewhat mincing in thelatter part of his confession, which, in the former, he had moreingenuously acknowledged: but this day, the church receivedsatisfaction, as was testified by their holding-up of their hands;and, after the whole, a word of caution by the pastor was dropped uponthe offender in particular, and upon us all in general. "

Mr. Parris was evidently inclined to magnify the importance of thechurch, and to get it into such a state of subserviency to hisauthority, that he could wield it effectually as a weapon in his fightwith the congregation. With this view, he endeavored to render theaction of the church as dignified and imposing as possible; to enlargeand expand its ceremonial proceedings, and make it the theatre for theexercise of his authority as its head and ruler. This feature of hispolicy was so strikingly illustrated in the course he took inreference to the deacons, that I must present it as recorded by him inthe church-book. It is worth preserving as a curiosity inecclesiastical administration. 

Nathaniel Ingersoll had been a professor of religion almost as long asMr. Parris had lived. He was eminently a Christian man, ofacknowledged piety, and beloved and revered by all. He had been thepatron, benefactor, and guardian of the parish and all its interestsfrom its formation. He had long held the title of deacon, andexercised the functions of that office so far as they could beexercised previous to the organization of a church. He had been thealmoner of the charities of the people, and their adviser andreligious friend in all things. He was approaching the boundaries ofadvanced years, and already recognized among the fathers of thecommunity. It would have seemed no more than what all might haveexpected, to have had him recognized as a deacon of the church, infull standing, at the first. It was, no doubt, what all did expect. But no: he must be put upon probation. He was chosen deacon "for thepresent" in November, 1689. Mr. Parris kept the matter of confirmationhanging in his own hands for a year and a half. The appointment of theother deacon was kept suspended for a full year. On the 30th ofNovember, 1690, there is the following entry:--

 "This evening, after the public service was over, the church was, by the pastor, desired to stay, and then by him Brother Edward Putnam was propounded as a meet person for to be chosen as another deacon. The issue whereof was, that, it being now an excessive cold day, some did propose that another season might be pitched upon for discourse thereof. Whereupon the pastor mentioned the next fourth day, at two of the clock, at the pastor's house, for further discourse thereof; to which the church agreed by not dissenting. "

The record of the proceedings on the "next fourth day" is asfollows:--

 "3 December, 1690. --This afternoon, at a church meeting appointed the last sabbath, Brother Edward Putnam was again propounded to the church for choice to office in the place of a deacon to join with, and be assistant to, Brother Ingersoll in the service, and in order to said Putnam's ordination in the office, upon his well approving himself therein. Some proposed that two might be nominated to the church, out of which the church to choose one. But arguments satisfactory were produced against that way. Some also moved for a choice by papers; but that way also was disapproved by the arguments of the pastor and some others. In fine, the pastor put it to vote (there appearing not the least exception from any, unless a modest and humble exception of the person himself, once and again), and it was carried in the affirmative by a universal vote, _nemine non suffragante_. 

 "Afterwards, the pastor addressed himself to the elected brother, and, in the name of the church, desired his answer, who replied to this purpose:--

 'Seeing, sir, you say the voice of God's people is the voice of God, desiring your prayers and the prayers of the church for divine assistance therein, I do accept of the call. '"

When we consider that Edward Putnam was, at Mr. Parris's ordinationmore than a year before, and had been for some time previous to thatevent, Ingersoll's associate deacon, and that there probably never wasany other person spoken or thought of than these two for deacons, itis evident that it was Mr. Parris's policy to make a great matter ofthe affair, and produce a general feeling of the weighty importance ofchurch action in the premises. But this was only the beginning of thelong-drawn ceremonial solemnities by which the occasion was magnified. 

 "Sab: day, 7 December, 1690. --After the evening public service was over, several things needful were transacted; viz. :--

 "1. The pastor acquainted those of the church that were ignorant of it, that Brother Edward Putnam was chosen deacon the last church meeting. 

 "2. He also generally admonished those of the brethren that were absent at that time, of their disorderliness therein, telling them that such, the apostle bids, should be noted or marked (2 Thess. Iii. 6-16); that is, with a church mark, --a mark in a disciplinary way; and therefore begged amendment for the future in that point and to that purpose. 

 "3. He propounded whether they so far were satisfied in Brother Ingersoll's service as to call him to settlement in the deaconship by ordination, or had aught against it. But no brother made personal exception. Therefore, it being put to vote, it was carried in the affirmative by a plurality, if not universality. 

 "4. The Lord's Table, not being provided for with aught else but two pewter tankards, the pastor propounded and desired that the next sacrament-day, which is to be the 21st instant, there be a more open and liberal contribution by the communicants, that so the deacons may have wherewith to furnish the said table decently; which was consented to. "

The last clause, "which was consented to, " is in a smaller hand thanthe rest of the record. It was written by Mr. Parris, but apparentlysome time afterwards, and with fainter ink. There is reason to supposethat nothing was accomplished at that time in the way of getting ridof the "pewter tankards. " The farmers were too hard pressed by taxesimposed by the province, and by the weight of local assessments, tolisten to fanciful appeals. They probably continued for some time, andperhaps until after receiving Deacon Ingersoll's legacy, in 1720, toget along as they were. They did not believe, that, in order toapproach the presence, and partake of the memorials, of the Saviour, it was necessary to bring vessels of silver or gold. In theircircumstances, gathered in their humble rustic edifice for worship, they did not feel that, in the sight of the Lord, costly furniturewould add to the adornment of his table. 

Nearly six months after Putnam's election, Mr. Parris brought up thematter again at a meeting of the church, on the 31st of May, 1691, andmade a speech relating to it, which he entered on the records thus:--

 "The pastor spoke to the brethren to this purpose, viz. :--

 "BRETHREN, --The ordination of Brother Ingersoll has already been voted a good while since, and I thought to have consummated the affair a good time since, but have been put by, by diversity of occurrents; and, seeing it is so long since, I think it needless to make two works of one, and therefore intend the ordination of Brother Putnam together with Brother Ingersoll in the deaconship, if you continue in the same mind as when you elected him: therefore, if you are so, let a vote manifest it. Voted by all, or at least the most. I observed none that voted not. "

At last the mighty work was accomplished. Deacon Ingersoll had been onprobation for eighteen months from the date of his election, whichtook place five days after Mr. Parris's ordination. His finalinduction to office was observed with great formality, and in thepresence of the whole congregation. Mr. Parris enters the order ofperformances in the church records as follows:--

 "Sab: 28 June, 1691. --After the afternoon sermon upon 1 Tim. Iii. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, as the brethren had renewed their call of Brother Ingersoll to the office of a deacon, and he himself had declared his acceptance, the pastor proceeded to ordain him, using the form following:

 "BELOVED BROTHER, God having called you to the office of a deacon by the choice of the brethren and your own acceptance, and that call being now to be consummated according to the primitive pattern, 6 Acts 6, by prayer and imposition of hands, --

 "We do, therefore, by this solemnity, declare your investiture into that office, solemnly charging you in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of his Church, who walks in the midst of his golden candlesticks, with eyes as of a flame of fire, exactly observing the demeanor of all in his house, both officers and members, that you labor so to carry it, as to evidence you are sanctified by grace, qualified for this work, and to grow in those qualifications; behaving of yourself gravely, sincerely, temperately, with due care for the government of your own house, holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience; that as they in this office are called 'helps, ' so you be helpful in your place and capacity, doing what is your part for the promoting of the work of Christ here. We do charge you, that, whatever you do in this office, you do it faithfully, giving with simplicity, showing mercy with cheerfulness. Look on it, brother, as matter of care, and likewise of encouragement, that both the office itself and also your being set up in it is of God, who, being waited upon, will be with you, and accept you therein, assisting you to use the office of a deacon well, so as that you may be blameless, purchasing to yourself a good degree and great boldness in the faith. 

 "NOTE. --That Brother Putnam was not yet willing to be ordained, but desired further considering time, between him and I and Brother Ingersoll, in private discourse the week before the ordination above said. "

"Brother Putnam" probably partook of the general wonder what all thisappearance of difficulty and delay, under the peculiar circumstancesof the case, meant; and being, as the record truly says, a modest andhumble man, he naturally shrank from the formidable ceremoniousnessand pretentious parade with which Mr. Parris surrounded thetransaction. At any rate, he hesitated long before he was willing toencounter it. It is probable that he positively refused to have hisinduction to the office heralded with such solemn pomp. There is nomention of his public ordination, which Mr. Parris would not haveomitted to record, had any such scene occurred. All we know is that hewas recognized as deacon forthwith, and held the office for fortyyears. 

The disposition of Mr. Parris to make use of his office, as the headof the church, to multiply occasions for the exercise of hisinfluence, and to gain control over the minds of the brethren, isapparent throughout his records. He raised objections in order to showhow he could remove them, and started difficulties about matters whichhad not before been brought into question. In the beginning of hisministry, he manifested this propensity. At a church meeting at JohnPutnam's house, Feb. 20, 1690, less than three months after hisordination, he threw open the whole question of baptism for discussionamong the brethren. There is no reason to suppose that their attentionhad been drawn to it before. He propounded the question to the plain, practical husbandmen, "Who are the proper subjects of baptism?" Helaid down the true doctrine, as he regarded it, in this answer, "Covenant-professing believers and their infant seed. " He put theanswer to vote, and none voted against it. He then proceeded withanother question, "How far may we account such seed infant seed, andso to be baptized?" Here he had got beyond their depth, and, as someof them thought, his own too; for there was only a "major vote" infavor of his answer: "two or three, I think not four, dissented. "There was some danger of getting into divisions by introducing suchquestions; but he managed to avoid it, so far as his church wasconcerned. He worked them up to the highest confidence in his learningand wisdom, and gained complete ascendency over them. He aggrandizedtheir sense of importance, and accomplished his object in securingtheir support in his controversies with his congregation. Thebrethren, after a while, became his devoted body-guard, and the churcha fortress of defence and assault. There is reason, however, tobelieve, that the points he raised on the subject of baptism led toperplexities, in some minds, which long continued to disturb them. While showing off his learning, and displaying his capacity to disposeof the deep questions of theology, he let fall seeds of division anddoubt that ripened into contention in subsequent generations. The onlyripple on the surface of the Village Church during its long record ofpeace, since the close of his disastrous ministry, was occasioned bydiffering opinions on this subject. It required all the wisdom of hissuccessors to quiet them. From time to time, formulas had to beconstructed, half-way covenants of varying expressions to be framed, to meet and dispose of the difficulties thus gratuitously raised byhim. 

The following passages from his record-book show how he made much of amatter which any other pastor would have quietly arranged withoutcalling for the intervention of church or congregation: they are alsointeresting as a picture of the times:--

 "Sab: 9 Aug. 1691. --After all public worship was over, and the church stayed on purpose, I proposed to the church whether they were free to admit to baptism, upon occasion, such as were not at present free to come up to full communion. I told them there was a young woman, by name Han: Wilkins, the daughter of our Brother Thomas Wilkins, who much desired to be baptized, but yet did not dare to come to the Lord's Supper. If they had nothing against it, I should take their silence for consent, and in due time acquaint them with what she had offered me to my satisfaction, and proceed accordingly. "

No answer was made _pro_ or _con_, and so the church was dismissed. 

 "Sab: 23 Aug. 1691. --Hannah Wilkins, aged about twenty-one years, was called forth, and her relation read in the full assembly, and then it was propounded to the church, that, if they had just exceptions, or, on the other hand, had any thing farther to encourage, they had opportunity and liberty to speak. None said any thing but Brother Bray Wilkins (Han: grandfather), who said, that, for all he knew, such a relation as had been given and a conversation suitable (as he judged hers to be) was enough to enjoy full communion. None else saying any thing, it was put to vote whether they were so well satisfied as to receive this young woman into membership, and therefore initiate her therein by baptism. It was voted fully. Whereupon the covenant was given to her as if she had entered into full communion. And the pastor told her, in the name of the church, that we would expect and wait for her rising higher, and therefore advised her to attend all means conscientiously for that end. 

 "After all, I pronounced her a member of this church, and then baptized her. 

 "28 August, 1691. --This day, Sister Hannah Wilkins aforesaid came to me, and spake to this like effect, following:--

 "Before I was baptized (you know, sir), I was desirous of communion at the Lord's Table, but not yet; I was afraid of going so far: but since my baptism I find my desires growing to the Lord's Table, and I am afraid to turn my back upon that ordinance, or to refuse to partake thereof. And that which moves me now to desire full communion, which I was afraid of before, is that of Thomas, 20 John 26, &c. , where he, being absent from the disciples, though but once, lost a sight of Christ, and got more hardness of heart, or increase of unbelief. And also those words of Ananias to Paul after his conversion, 22 Acts 16, 'And now why tarriest thou? Arise, ' &c. So I am afraid of tarrying. The present time is only mine. And God having, beyond my deserts, graciously opened a door, I look upon it my duty to make present improvement of it. 

 "Sab: and Sacrament Day, 30 Aug. 1691. --Sister Han: Wilkins's motion (before the celebration of the Lord's Supper was begun) was mentioned or propounded to the church, and what she said to me (before hinted) read to them, and then their vote was called for, to answer her desire if they saw good; whereupon the church voted in the affirmative plentifully. "

The foregoing passages illustrate Mr. Parris's propensity to magnifythe operations of the church, and to bring its movements asconspicuously and as often as possible before the eyes of the people. It is evident that the humble and timid scruples of this interestingand intelligent young woman might have been met and removed bypersonal conference with her pastor. As her old grandfather seemed tothink, there was no difficulty in the case whatever. The reflectionsof a few days made the path plain before her. But Mr. Parris paradedthe matter on three sabbaths before the church, and on one of them atleast before the congregation. He called her to come forth, and standout in the presence of the "full assembly. " As the result of theordeal, she owned the covenant; the church voted her in, as to fullcommunion; and the pastor pronounced her a member of the church, andbaptized her as such. Her sensible conversation with him the nextFriday was evidently intended for the satisfaction of him and others, as explaining her appearance at the next communion. But anotheropportunity was offered to make a display of the case, and he couldnot resist the temptation. He desired to create an impression byreading what she had said to him in his study, before the church, ifnot before the whole congregation. To give a show of propriety inbringing it forward again, he felt that some action must be had uponit; hence the vote. Accordingly, Hannah Wilkins appears by the recordto have been twice, on two successive Lord's Days, voted "plentifully"into the Salem Village Church, when there was no occasion for such anextraordinary repetition, as everybody from the first welcomed herinto it with the cordial confidence she merited. I have spread outthis proceeding to your view, not altogether from its intrinsicinterest, but because, perhaps, it affords the key to interpret thecourse of this ill-starred man in his wrangles with his congregation, and his terrible prominency in the awful scenes of the witchcraftdelusion. He seemed to have had a love of excitement that wasirrepressible, an all but insane passion for getting up a scene. Whenwe come to the details of our story, it will be for a charitablejudgment to determine whether this trait of his nature may not beregarded as the cause of all the woes in which he involved others andbecame involved himself. 

The church records are, in one respect, in singular contrast with theparish records. The latter are often silent in reference to matters ofinterest at the time, which might without impropriety have beenentered in them. They are confined strictly to votes and proceedingsin legal meetings, or what purport to have been meetings legallycalled; and we look in vain for comments or notices relating tooutside matters. Except when kept by Sergeant Thomas Putnam, they aredefective and imperfect. The church records, while made by Mr. Parris, are full of side remarks, and touches of criticism concerning whateverwas going on. This makes them particularly interesting and valuablenow. They are composed in their author's clear, natural, and sprightlystyle; and, although for the most part in an exceedingly small hand, are legible with perfect ease, and give us a transcript, not only ofthe formal doings of the church, but of the writer's mind and feelingsabout matters and things in general. We gather from them by far thegreater part of all we know relating to his quarrel with hiscongregation. 

This subject constantly engrossed his thoughts. He was continuallyintroducing, at church meetings, complaints against the conduct of theparish committee, and enlarging upon the wrongs he was suffering attheir hands. He took occasion on Lecture days, if not in ordinarydiscourses on the Lord's Day, to give all possible circulation andpublicity to his grievances. The effect of this was, instead ofbringing his people into subjection and carrying his points againstthem, to aggravate their alienation. His manner of dealing with thedifficulties of the situation into which they had been brought washarsh and exasperating, and utterly injudicious, imprudent, andmischievous in all its bearings, producing a condition of things trulyscandalous. His notions and methods, acquired in his mercantile life;his haggling with the people about the terms of his salary; and hisgeneral manner and tone, particularly so far as they had been formedby residence in West-India slave Islands, --were thoroughlydistasteful, and entirely repugnant, to the feelings, notions, ideas, and spirit of the farmers of Salem Village. At their meetings, theyshowed a continually increasing strength of opposition to him, andwere careful to appoint committees who could not be brought under hisinfluence, and would stand firm against all outside pressure. 

It is quite apparent, that Mr. Parris employed his church, and theministerial offices generally, as engines to operate against hisopponents; and sometimes rather unscrupulously, as a collocation ofdates and entries shows. A meeting of the parish was warned to be heldOct. 16, 1691. It was important to bring his machinery to bear uponthe feelings of the people, so as to strengthen the hands of hisfriends at that meeting. The following entry is in the church-book, dated 8th October, 1691: "Being my Lecture-day, after public servicewas ended, I was so bare of firewood, that I was forced publicly todesire the inhabitants to take care that I might be provided for;telling them, that, had it not been for Mr. Corwin (who had boughtwood, being then at my house), I should hardly have any to burn. "According to his own account, as we have seen, it had been arranged, by mutual agreement, that he was to provide his own firewood, sixpounds per annum having been added to his salary for that purpose. Heselected that item as one of the necessaries of which he was in want, probably because, as the winter was approaching, it would be the bestpoint on which to appeal to the public sympathies, and get up aclamor against his opponents. 

The parish meeting was duly held on the 16th of October. Mr. Parris'sspeech, at the preceding Lecture-day, about "firewood, " was found notto have produced the desired effect. The majority against him was asstrong as ever. A committee made up of his opponents was elected. Amotion to instruct them to make a rate was rejected, and a warrantordered to be forthwith issued for a special meeting of theinhabitants, to examine into all the circumstances connected with thesettlement of Mr. Parris, and to ascertain whether the meetings whichhad acted therein were legally called, and by what means the right andtitle of the parish to its ministry house and lands had been broughtinto question. This was pressing matters to an issue. Mr. Parris sawit, and determined to meet it in advance. He resorted to his church, as usual, to execute his plan, as the following entries on therecord-book show:--

 "1 Nov. 1691. --The pastor desired the brethren to meet at my house, on to-morrow, an hour and half before sundown. 

 "2 Nov. 1691. --After sunset, about seventeen of the brethren met; to whom, after prayer, I spoke to this effect: Brethren, I have not much to trouble you with now; but you know what committee, the last town-meeting here, were chosen; and what they have done, or intend to do; it may be better than I. But, you see, I have hardly any wood to burn. I need say no more, but leave the matter to your serious and godly consideration. 

 "In fine, after some discourse to and fro, the church voted that Captain Putnam and the two deacons should go, as messengers from the church, to the committee, to desire them to make a rate for the minister, and to take care of necessary supplies for him; and that said messengers should make their return to the church the next tenth day, an hour before sunset, at the minister's house, where they would expect it. 

 "10 Nov. 1691. --The messengers abovesaid came with their return, as appointed; which was, that the committee did not see good to take notice of their message, without they had some letter to show under the church's and pastor's hand. But, at this last church meeting, besides the three messengers, but three other brethren did appear, --namely, Brother Thomas Putnam, Thomas Wilkins, and Peter Prescot, --which slight and neglect of other brethren did not a little trouble me, as I expressed myself. But I told these brethren I expected the church should be more mindful of me than other people, and their way was plain before them, &c. 

 "Sab: 15 Nov. 1691. --The church were desired to meet at Brother Nathaniel Putnam's, the next 18th instant, at twelve o'clock, to spend some time in prayer, and seeking God's presence with us, the next Lord's Day, at his table, as has been usual with us, some time before the sacrament. 

 "18 Nov. 1691. --After some time spent, as above said, at this church meeting, the pastor desired the brethren to stay, forasmuch as he had somewhat to offer to them, which was to this purpose; viz. : Brethren, several church meetings have been occasionally warned, and sometimes the appearance of the brethren is but small to what it might be expected, and particularly the case mentioned 10th instant. I told them I did not desire to warn meetings unnecessarily, and, therefore, when I did, I prayed them they would regularly attend them. 

 "Furthermore, I told them I had scarce wood enough to burn till the morrow, and prayed that some care might be taken. In fine, after discourses passed, these following votes were made unanimously, namely:--

 "1. That it was needful that complaint should be made to the next honored County Court, to sit at Salem, the next third day of the week, against the neglects of the present committee. 

 "2. That the said complaint should be drawn up, which was immediately done by one of the brethren, and consented to. 

 "3. That our brethren, Nathaniel Putnam, Thomas Putnam, and Thomas Wilkins, should sign said complaint in behalf of the church. 

 "4. Last, That our brethren, Captain John Putnam and the two deacons, should be improved to present the said complaint to the said Court. 

 "In the mean time, the pastor desired the brethren that care might be taken that he might not be destitute of wood. "

The record proceeds to give several other votes, the object of whichwas to arrange the details of the manner in which the business was tobe put into court. There we leave it for the present, and there itremained for nearly seven years. Mr. Parris probably got the start ofhis opponents, in being first to invoke the law. This is what he meantwhen he told his church "that their way was plain before them. " Ifextraordinary and unforeseen circumstances had not intervened, thecase would more speedily have been disposed of, and we cannot doubtwhat would have been its issue. Whatever might be the bias orprejudice of the courts, or however they might have attempted toenforce their first decisions, there can be no question, that, in sucha contest, the people would have finally prevailed. The committee weremen competent to carry the parish through. A religious society, withsuch feelings between them and their minister, after all that hadhappened, and the just grounds given them of dissatisfaction andresentment, could not always, or long, have been kept under such aninfliction. 

In the immediately preceding entries, there are some points thatillustrate the policy on which Mr. Parris acted, and exhibit the skilland vigilance of his management. The motive that led him to harp soconstantly upon "firewood" is obvious. It was to create a sympathy inhis behalf, and bring opprobrium upon his opponents. But it cannotstand the test of scrutiny: for it had been expressly agreed, as Ihave said, that he should find his own fuel; and it cannot be supposedthat his friends, if he then had any real ones, surrounded, as theywere, with forests of their own, within sight of the parsonage, wouldhave allowed him to suffer from this cause. There is indication thatthe "brethren of the church" were getting lukewarm, as theirnon-attendance at important meetings led Mr. Parris to fear. At anyrate, he felt it necessary to administer some rather significantrebukes to them. The meeting for prayer, preparatory to the ensuingcommunion service, was very adroitly converted into a businessconsultation to inaugurate a lawsuit. But the most characteristicthing, in this part of the church-book, is a marginal entry, againstthe first paragraph of the record of the 2d November, 1691. It is inthese words:--

 "The town-meeting, about or at 16th October last. Jos: Porter, Jos: Hutchinson, Jos: Putnam, Dan: Andrew, Francis Nurse. "

These were the committee appointed at the meeting. Their names, thusabbreviated, are given, and not a syllable added. But the manner, thethen state of things, and their relation to the controversy, give adeep import and intense bitterness to this entry. He knew the men, andin their names read the handwriting on the wall. 

But a turn was soon given to the current that was bearing Mr. Parrisdown. A power was evoked--whether he raised it designedly, or whetherit merely happened to appear on the scene, we cannot certainly say;but it came into action just at the nick of time--which instantlyreversed the position of the parties, and clothed him with a terriblestrength, enabling him to crush his opponents beneath his feet. In afew short months, he was the arbiter of life and death of all thepeople of the village and the country. "Jos: Porter and Jos:Hutchinson" escaped. The power of destruction broke down before itbecame strong enough to reach them perhaps. "Jos: Putnam" was kept forsix months in the constant peril of his life. During all that time, heand his family were armed, and kept watch. "Dan: Andrew" saved himselffrom the gallows by flight to a foreign land. The unutterable woesbrought upon the family of "Francis Nurse" remain to be related. 

The witchcraft delusion at Salem Village, in 1692, has attracteduniversal attention, constitutes a permanent chapter in the world'shistory, and demands a full exposition, and, if possible, a truesolution. Being convinced that it cannot be correctly interpretedwithout a thorough knowledge of the people among whom it appeared, Ihave felt it indispensable, before opening its scenes to view, ortreating the subject of demonology, of which it was an outgrowth, inthe first place to prepare myself, and those who accompany me in itsexamination and discussion, to fully comprehend it, by traversing theground over which we have now passed. By a thorough history of SalemVillage from its origin to the period of our story, by calling itsfounders and their children and successors into life before you bypersonal, private, domestic, and local details, gleaned from oldrecords and documents, I have tried to place you at the standpointfrom which the entire occurrence can be intelligibly contemplated. Wecan in no other way get a true view of a passage of history than bylooking at the men who acted in it, as they really were. We mustunderstand their characters, enter into their life, see with theireyes, feel with their hearts, and be enveloped, as it were, with theirassociations, sentiments, beliefs, and principles of action. In thisway only can we bring the past into our presence, comprehend itselements, fathom its depths, read its meaning, or receive its lessons. 

I am confident you will agree with me, that it was not because thepeople of Salem Village were more ignorant, stupid, or weak-mindedthan the people of other places, that the delusion made its appearanceor held its sway among them. This is a vital point to the justconsideration of the subject. I do not mean justice to them so much asto ourselves and all who wish to understand, and be benefited byunderstanding, the subject. There never was a community composedoriginally of better materials, or better trained in all good usages. Although the generations subsequent to the first had not enjoyed, toany considerable extent, the advantages of education, thecircumstances of their experience had kept their faculties in thefullest exercise. They were an energetic and intelligent people. Theirmoral condition, social intercourse, manners, and personal bearing, were excellent. The lesson of the catastrophe impending over them, atthe point to which we have arrived, can only be truly and fullyreceived, for the warning of all coming time, by having correct viewson this point. The delusion that brought ruin upon them was not theresult of any essential inferiority in their moral or intellectualcondition. What we call their ignorance was the received philosophyand wisdom of the day, accepted generally by the great scholars ofthat and previous ages, preached from the pulpits, taught in theuniversities, recognized in law and in medicine as well as theology, and carried out in the proceedings of public tribunals and legislativeassemblies. 

The history of the planting, settlement, and progress of SalemVillage, to 1692, has now been given. We know, so far as existingmaterials within reach enable us to know, what sort of a populationoccupied the place at the date of our story. Their descent, breeding, and experiences have been related. They were, at least, equal inintelligence to any of the people of their day. They were strenuous inaction, trained to earnestness and zeal, accustomed to become deeplyengaged in whatever interested them, and to take strong hold of theideas and sentiments they received. It becomes necessary, therefore, in the next place, to ascertain what their ideas were in reference towitchcraft, diabolical agency, and supernaturalism generally. I shallproceed accordingly to give the condition of opinion, at that time, onthe subject of demonology. 

PART SECOND. 

WITCHCRAFT. 

Demonology, as a general term, may be employed, for convenience, toinclude a whole class of ideas--which, under different names and avast variety of conceptions, have come through all ages, and prevailedamong all races of mankind--relating to the supposed agency ofsupernatural, invisible, and spiritual beings in terrestrial affairs. As necessarily applicable to evil spirits, particularly to thearch-enemy and supreme adversary of God and man under the name ofSatan or the Devil, the term does not appear to have been used inancient times. Professed communications with supernatural beings werenot originally stamped with a diabolical character, but, like somealleged to be had in our day, were regarded as innocent, and evencreditable. Men sought to hold intercourse with spirits belonging tothe unseen world, as some persons do now; assuming that they wereworthy of confidence, and that responses from them were valuable anddesirable. This was the case under the reign of classical mythology, and of heathen superstition in general. Those individuals who weresupposed to be conversant with demons were looked upon by thecredulous multitude as a highly privileged class; and they arrogatedthe credit of being raised to a higher sphere of knowledge than therest of mankind. 

It is one of the most remarkable peculiarities of the Hebrew polity, that it denounced such pretended communications as criminal, andsubjected the practice to the highest penalties. It was assumed to bedangerous; the welfare of individuals and of society requiring thatsuch pretensions and practices should be abandoned. The observationand experience of mankind have justified this view. In the first agesof Christianity, it was believed that the Divine Being alone was to besought in prayer for light and guidance by the human soul. Gradually, as the dark ages began to settle upon Christendom, the doctrine of theDevil as the head and ruler of a world of demons, and as able to holdcommunications with mortals, to interfere in their affairs, and toexercise more or less control over the laws and phenomena of nature, began to become prevalent. It was believed that human beings couldenter into alliance with the Prince of the power of the air; becomehis confederates; join in a league with him and wicked spiritssubordinate to him, in undermining the Gospel and overthrowing theChurch; and conspire and co-operate in rebellion against God. This, of course, was regarded as the most flagrant of crimes, andconstituted the real character of the sin denominated "witchcraft. "

As the fullest, most memorable, and, by the notice it has ever sinceattracted throughout the world, the pre-eminent instance anddemonstration of this supposed iniquity was in the crisis that tookplace in Salem Village in 1692, it justly claims a place in history. The community in which it occurred has been fully described, in itsmoral, social, and intellectual condition, so far as the materials Ihave been enabled to obtain have rendered possible. It has, I believe, been made to appear, that, in their training, experience, and traitsof character, they were well adapted to give full effect to anyexcitement, or earnest action of any kind, that could be got up amongthem, --a people of great energy, courage, and resolution, wellprepared to carry out to its natural and legitimate results anymovement, and follow established convictions fearlessly to logicalconclusions. The experiment of bringing supernaturalism to operate inhuman affairs, to become a ground of action in society, and tointerfere in the relations of life and the dealings of men with eachother, was as well tried upon this people as it ever could or can beanywhere. 

All that remains to be brought to view, before entering upon thedetails of the narrative, is to give a just and adequate idea of theform and shape in which the general subject of supernaturalism, in itsaspect as demonology, lay in the minds of men here at that time. Todo this, I must give a sketch, as condensed and brief as I can makeit, of the formation and progress of opinions and notions touching thesubject, until they reached their full demonstration and finalexplosion, in this neighborhood, at Salem Village, near the close ofthe seventeenth century. 

No person who looks around him on the scene in which he is placed, reflects upon the infinite wonders of creation, and meditates upon theequal wonders of his own mind, can be at a loss respecting the sourcesand causes of superstition. Let him transport himself back to thecondition of a primitive and unlettered people, before whom the worldappears in all its original and sublime mystery. Science has notlifted to their eyes the curtain behind which the secret operations ofnature are carried on. They observe the tides rise and fall, but knownot the attractive law that regulates their movements; theycontemplate the procession of the seasons, without any conception ofthe principles and causes that determine and produce their changes;they witness the storm as it rises in its wrath; they listen with aweto the thunder-peal, and gaze with startling terror upon the lightningas it flashes from within the bosom of the black cloud, and areutterly ignorant to what power to attribute the dreadful phenomena;they look upward to the face of the sky, and see the myriad starryhosts that glitter there, and all is to them a mighty maze of dazzlingconfusion. It is for their fancy to explain, interpret, and fill upthe brilliant and magnificent scene. 

The imagination was the faculty the exercise of which was chieflycalled for in such a state as this. Before science had traced theoperations and unfolded the secrets of nature, man was living in aworld full of marvel and mystery. His curiosity was attracted to everyobject within the reach of his senses; and, in the absence ofknowledge, it was imagination alone that could make answer to itsinquiries. It is natural to suppose that he would be led to attributeall the movements and operations of the external world which did notappear to be occasioned by the exercise of his own power, or the powerof any other animal, to the agency of supernatural beings. We may alsoconclude, that his belief would not be likely to fix upon the notionof a single overruling Being. Although revelation and science havedisclosed to us a beautiful and entire unity and harmony in thecreation, the phenomena of the external world would probably impressthe unenlightened and unphilosophic observer with the belief thatthere was a diversity in the powers which caused them. He wouldimagine the agency of a being of an amiable and beneficent spirit inthe bright sunshine, the fresh breeze, and the mild moonlight; and hisfancy would suggest to his fears, that a dark, severe, and terriblebeing was in the ascendant during a day overshadowed by frowningclouds, or a night black with the storm and torn by the tempest. 

By the aid of such reflections as these, we are easily conducted to asatisfactory and sufficient explanation of the origin of the mythologyand fabulous superstitions of all ancient and primitive nations. Fromthis the progress is plain, obvious, and immediate to the pretensionsof magicians, diviners, sorcerers, conjurers, oracles, soothsayers, augurs, and the whole catalogue of those persons who professed to holdintercourse with higher and spiritual powers. There are severalclasses into which they may be divided. 

There were those who, to acquire an influence over the people, pretended to possess the confidence, and enjoy the friendship andcounsel, of some one or more deities. Such was Numa, the earlylawgiver of the Roman State. In order to induce the people to adoptthe regulations, institutions, and religious rites he proposed, hemade them believe that he had access to a divinity, and received allhis plans and ideas as a communication from on high. 

Persons who, in consequence of their superior acquirements, wereenabled to excel others in any pursuit, or who could foresee and availthemselves of events in the natural world, were liable, without anyintention to deceive, to be classed under some of these denominations. For instance, a Roman farmer, Furius Cresinus, surpassed all hisneighbors in the skill and success with which he managed hisagricultural affairs. He was accordingly accused of using magic artsin the operations of his farm. So far were his neighbors carried bytheir feelings of envy and jealousy, that they explained the fact ofhis being able to derive more produce from a small lot of land thanthey could from large ones, by charging him with attracting anddrawing off the productions of their fields into his own by theemployment of certain mysterious charms. For his defence, as we areinformed by Pliny, he produced his strong and well-constructedploughs, his light and convenient spades, and his sun-burnt daughters, and pointing to them exclaimed: "Here are my charms; this is my magic;these only are the witchcraft I have used. " Zoroaster, the greatphilosopher and astronomer of the ancient East, was charged withdivination and magic, merely, it is probable, because he possesseduncommon acquirements. 

There were persons who had acquired an extraordinary amount of naturalknowledge, and, for the sake of being regarded with wonder and awe bythe people, pretended to obtain their superior endowments fromsupernatural beings. They affected the name and character ofsorcerers, diviners, and soothsayers. It is easy to conceive of theearly existence and the great influence of such impostors. Patientobservation, and often mere accident, would suggest discoveries of theexistence and operation of natural causes in producing phenomenabefore ascribed to superhuman agency. The knowledge thus acquiredwould be cautiously concealed, and cunningly used, to createastonishment and win admiration. Its fortunate possessors were enabledto secure the confidence, obedience, and even reverence, of thebenighted and deceived people. 

Every one, indeed, who could discover a secret of nature, and keep itsecret, was able to impose himself on the world as being allied withsupernatural powers. Hence arose the whole host of diviners, astrologers, soothsayers, and oracles. After having once acquiredpossession of the credulous faith of the people, they could imposeupon them almost without limit. 

Those who pretended to hold this kind of intercourse with divinitybecame, as a natural consequence, the priests of the nation, constituted a distinct and regular profession, and perpetuated theirbody by the admission of new members, to whom they explained theirarts, and communicated their knowledge. While they were continuallydiscovering and applying the secret principles and laws of nature, andthe people were kept in utter ignorance and darkness, it is no wonderthat they reached a great and unparalleled degree of power over themass of the population. In this manner we account for the origin, andtrace the history, of the Chaldean priests in Assyria, the Bramins ofIndia, the Magi of Persia, the Oracles of Greece, the Augurs of Italy, the Druids of Britain, and the Pow-wows, Prophets, or "Medicins, " asthey sometimes called them, among our Indians. 

It is probable that the witches mentioned in the Scriptures were ofthis description. Neither in sacred nor profane ancient history do wefind what was understood in the days of our ancestors by witchcraft, which meant a formal and actual compact with the great Prince of evilbeings. The sorcery of antiquity consisted in pretending to possesscertain mysterious charms, and to do by their means, or by theco-operation of superhuman spirits, without any reference to theircharacter as evil or good beings, what transcends the action of merenatural powers. 

The witch of Endor, for instance, was a conjurer and necromancer, rather than a witch. By referring to the 28th chapter of 1 Samuel, where the interview between her and Saul is related, you will find noground for the opinion that the being from whom she pretended toreceive her mysterious power was Satan. Saul, as the ruler of a peoplewho were under the special government, and enjoyed the peculiarprotection of the true God, had forbidden, under the sanction of thehighest penalties, the exercise of the arts of divination and sorcerywithin his jurisdiction. Some time after this, the unfortunate monarchwas overtaken by trouble and distress. His enemies had risen up, andwere gathered in fearful strength around him. His "heart greatlytrembled, " a dark and gloomy presentiment came over his spirit, andhis bosom was convulsed by an agony of solicitude. He turned towardhis God for light and strength. He applied for relief to the priestsof the altar, and to the prophets of the Most High; but his prayerswere unanswered, and his efforts vain. In his sorrow and apprehension, he appealed to a woman who was reputed to have supernatural powers, and to hold communion with spiritual beings; thus violating his ownlaw, and departing from duty and fidelity to his God. He begged herto recall Samuel to life, that he might be comforted and instructed byhim. She pretended to comply with his request; but, before she couldcommence her usual mysterious operations, Samuel arose! and theforlorn, wretched, and heart-broken king listened to his tremendousdoom, as it was uttered by the spirit of the departed prophet. 

I have alluded particularly to the witch of Endor, because she willserve to illustrate the sorcery or divination of antiquity. She wasprobably possessed of some secret knowledge of natural properties; wasskilful in the use of her arts and pretended charms; had, perhaps, thepeculiar powers of a ventriloquist; and, by successful imposture, hadacquired an uncommon degree of notoriety, and the entire confidence ofthe public. She professed to be in alliance with supernatural beings, and, by their assistance, to raise the dead. 

This passage has afforded a topic for a great deal of discussion amonginterpreters. It seems to me, on the face of the narrative, to suggestthe following view of the transaction: The woman was an impostor. Whenshe summoned the spirit of Samuel, instead of the results of her magiclantern, or of whatever contrivances she may have had, by theimmediate agency of the Almighty the spirit of Samuel really rose, tothe consternation and horror of the pretended necromancer. The writerappears to have indicated this as the proper interpretation of thescene, by saying, "that, when the woman saw Samuel, she cried with aloud voice;" thus giving evidence of alarm and surprise totallydifferent from the deportment of such pretenders on such occasions:they used rather to exhibit joy at the success of their arts, and aproud composure and dignified complacency in the control they werebelieved to exercise over the spirits that appeared to have obeyedtheir call. Sir Walter Scott took this view of the transaction. Hisopinion, it is true, would be considered more important in any otherdepartment than that of biblical interpretation: on all questions, however, connected with the spiritual world of fancy and with itshistory, he must be allowed to speak, if not with the authority, atleast with the tone of a master. This wonderful author, in theinfinite profusion and variety of his productions, published a volumeupon Demonology and Witchcraft: it is, of course, entertaining andinstructive to all who are curious to know the capacity and toappreciate the operations of the human imagination. 

It will be regarded by intelligent and judicious persons as acircumstance of importance in reference to the view now given of thetransaction in which the witch of Endor acts the leading part, thatHugh Farmer, beyond all question the most learned, discreet, andprofound writer on such subjects, is inclined to throw the weight ofhis authority in its favor. His ample and elaborate discussion of thequestion is to be seen in his work on Miracles, chap. Iv. Sec. 2. 

Among the heathen nations of antiquity, the art of divinationconsisted, to a great degree, in the magical use of mysteriouscharms. Many plants were considered as possessed of wonderful virtues, and there was scarcely a limit to the supposed power of those personswho knew how to use and apply them skilfully. Virgil, in his eightheclogue, thus speaks of this species of sorcery:--

 "These herbs did Moeris give to me And poisons pluckt at Pontus; For there they grow and multiplie And do not so amongst us: With these she made herselfe become A wolfe, and hid hir in the wood; She fetcht up souls out of their toome, Removing corne from where it stood. "

In the fourth Æneid, the lovesick Tyrian queen is thus made todescribe the magic which was then believed to be practised:--

 "Rejoice, " she said: "instructed from above, My lover I shall gain, or lose my love; Nigh rising Atlas, next the falling sun Long tracts of Ethiopian climates run: There a Massylian priestess I have found, Honored for age, for magic arts renowned: The Hesperian temple was her trusted care; 'Twas she supplied the wakeful dragon's fare; She, poppy-seeds in honey taught to steep, Reclaimed his rage, and soothed him into sleep; She watched the golden fruit. Her charms unbind The chains of love, or fix them on the mind; She stops the torrent, leaves the channel dry, Repels the stars, and backward bears the sky. The yawning earth rebellows to her call, Pale ghosts ascend, and mountain ashes fall. "

Tibullus, in the second elegy of his first book, gives the followingaccount of the powers ascribed to a magician:--

 "She plucks each star out of his throne, And turneth back the raging waves; With charms she makes the earth to cone, And raiseth souls out of their graves; She burns men's bones as with a fire, And pulleth down the lights of Heaven, And makes it snow at her desire E'en in the midst of summer season. "

These views continued to hold undisturbed dominion over the peopleduring a long succession of centuries. As the twilight of the darkages began to settle upon Christendom, superstition, thatnight-blooming plant, extended itself rapidly, and in all directions, over the surface of the world. While every thing else drooped andwithered, it struck deeper its roots, spread wider its branches, andbrought forth more abundantly its fruit. The unnumbered fables ofGreek and Roman mythology, the arts of augury and divination, thevisions of oriental romance, the fanciful and attenuated theories ofthe later philosophy, the abstract and spiritual doctrines ofPlatonism, and all the grosser and wilder conceptions of the northernconquerors of the Roman Empire, became mingled together in the faithof the inhabitants of the European kingdoms. From this multifariouscombination, the infinitely diversified popular superstitions of themodern nations have sprung. 

We first begin to trace the clear outlines of the doctrine ofwitchcraft not far from the commencement of the Christian era. Itpresupposes the belief of the Devil. I shall not enter upon thequestion, whether the Scriptures, properly interpreted, require thebelief of the existence of such a being. Directing our attentionsolely to profane sources of information, we discover the heathenorigin of the belief of the existence of the Devil in the ancientsystems of oriental philosophy. Early observers of nature in the Eastwere led to the conclusion, that the world was a divided empire, ruledby the alternate or simultaneous energy of two great antagonistprinciples or beings, one perfectly good, and the other perfectly bad. It was for a long time, and perhaps is at this day, a prevalent faithamong Christians, that the Bible teaches a similar doctrine; that itpresents, to our adoration and obedience, a being of infiniteperfections in the Deity; and to our abhorrence and our fears, a beinginfinitely wicked, and of great power, in the Devil. 

It is obvious, that, when the entire enginery of supernaturalism wasorganized in adaptation to the idea of the Devil, and demonologybecame synonymous with diabolism, the credulity and superstition ofmankind would give a wide extension to that form of belief. It soonoccupied a large space in the theories of religion and the fancies ofthe people, and got to be a leading element in the life of society. Itmade its impress on the forms of speech, and many of the phrases towhich it gave rise still remain in familiar use. It figured in therituals of religion, in the paraphernalia of public shows, and infireside tales. It afforded leading characters to the drama in themiracle plays and the moral plays, as they were called, at successiveperiods. It offered a ready weapon to satire, and also to defamation. Gerbert, a native of France, who was elevated to the pontificate aboutthe close of the tenth century, under the name of Sylvester II. , iseulogized by Mosheim as the first great restorer of science andliterature. He was a person of an extensive and sublime genius, ofwonderful attainments in learning, particularly mathematics, geometry, and arithmetic. He broke the profound sleep of the dark ages, andawakened the torpid intellect of the European nations. His efforts inthis direction roused the apprehensions and resentment of the monks;and they circulated, after Gerbert's death, and made the ignorantmasses believe the story, that he had obtained his rapid promotion inthe Church by the practice of the black art, which he disguised underthe show of learning; that he secured the Archbishopric of Ravenna bybribery and corruption; and that, finally, he made a bargain withSatan, promising him his soul after death, on condition that he(Satan) should put forth his great influence over the cardinals insuch a manner as would secure his election to the throne of St. Peter. The arrangement was carried into successful operation. Sylvester, themonks averred, consulted the Devil through the medium of a brazen headduring his whole reign, and enjoyed his faithful friendship andunwavering patronage. But, when His Holiness came to die, heendeavored to defraud Satan of his rightful claim to his soul, byrepenting, and acknowledging his sin. This illustrates the way inwhich the popular idea of the Devil was used to awaken ridicule andgratify malignity. 

The natural and ultimate effect of the diffusion of Christianity wasto overthrow, or rather to revolutionize, the whole system ofincantation and sorcery. 

In heathen countries, as in the East at present and with those amongus who profess to hold communications with spirits, no reproach orsentiment of disapprobation, as has already been observed, wasnecessarily connected with the arts of divination; for thesupernatural beings with whom intercourse was alleged to be had werenot, with a few exceptions, regarded as evil beings. The persons whowere thought to be skilful in their use were, on the contrary, held ingreat esteem, and looked upon with reverence. Magicians andphilosophers were convertible and synonymous terms. Learned andscientific men were induced to encourage, and turn to their ownadvantage, the popular credulity that ascribed their extraordinaryskill to their connection with spiritual and divine beings. At length, however, they found themselves placed in a very uncomfortablepredicament by the prevalence of the new theology. It was exceedinglydifficult to dispel the delusion, and correct the error they hadpreviously found it for their interest to perpetuate in the minds ofthe community. They could not convince them that their knowledge wasacquired from natural sources, or their operations conducted solelyby the aid of natural causes and laws. The people would not surrenderthe belief, that the results of scientific experiments, and theaccuracy of predictions of physical phenomena, were secured by theassistance of supernatural beings. 

As the doctrines of the gospel gradually undermined the popular beliefin other spiritual beings inferior to the Deity, and were at the sametime supposed to teach the existence and extensively diffused energyof an almost infinite and omnipotent agent of evil, it was exceedinglynatural, nay, it necessarily followed, that the credulity andsuperstition which had led to the supposition of an alliance betweenphilosophers and spiritual beings should settle down into a fullconviction that the Devil was the being with whom they were thusconfederated. The consequence was that they were charged withwitchcraft, and many fell victims to the general prejudice andabhorrence occasioned by the imputation. The influence of this stateof things was soon seen: it was one of the most effectual causes ofthe rapid diffusion of knowledge in modern times. Philosophers and menof science became as anxious to explain and publish their discoveriesas they had been in former ages to conceal and cover them withmystery. The following instances will be sufficient to illustrate thecorrectness of these views. 

In the thirteenth century, Roger Bacon was charged with witchcraft onaccount of his discoveries in optics, chemistry, and astronomy; and, although he did what he could to circulate and explain his ownacquirements, he could not escape a papal denunciation, and two longand painful imprisonments. In 1305, Arnold de Villa Nova, a learnedphysician and philosopher, was burned at Padua, by order ofinquisitors, on the charge of witchcraft. He was eighty years of age. Ten years afterwards, Peter Apon, also of Padua, who had madeextraordinary progress in knowledge, was accused of the same crime, and condemned to death, but expired previous to the time appointed forhis execution. 

I will now present a brief sketch of the most noticeable factsrelating to the subject in Europe and Great Britain previous to theclose of the seventeenth century. Some writers have computed thatthirty thousand persons were executed for this supposed crime, withinone hundred and fifty years. It will of course be in my power tomention only a few instances. 

In 1484, Pope Innocent the Eighth issued a bull encouraging andrequiring the arrest and punishment of persons suspected ofwitchcraft. From this moment, the prosecutions became frequent and thevictims numerous in every country. The very next year, forty-one agedfemales were consigned to the flames in one nation; and, not longafter, a hundred were burned by one inquisition in the devoted valleysof Piedmont; forty-eight were burned in Ravensburg in five years; and, in the year 1515, five hundred were burned at Geneva in three months!One writer declares that "almost an infinite number" were burned forwitchcraft in France, --a thousand in a single diocese! Thesesanguinary and horrible transactions were promoted and sanctioned bytheological hatred and rancor. It was soon perceived that there was nokind of difficulty in clearing the Church of heretics by hanging orburning them all as witches! The imputation of witchcraft could befixed upon any one with the greatest facility. In the earlier part ofthe fifteenth century, the Earl of Bedford, having taken thecelebrated Joan of Arc prisoner, put her to death on this charge. Shehad been almost adored by the people rescued by her romantic valor, and was universally known among them by the venerable title of "HolyMaid of God;" but no difficulty was experienced in procuring evidenceenough to lead her to the stake as a servant and confederate of Satan!Luther was just beginning his attack upon the papal power, and he wasinstantly accused of being in confederacy with the Devil. 

In 1534, Elizabeth Barton, "the Maid of Kent, " was executed forwitchcraft in England, together with seven men who had beenconfederate with her. In 1541 the Earl of Hungerford was beheaded forinquiring of a witch how long Henry VIII. Would live. In 1549 it wasmade the duty of bishops, by Archbishop Cranmer's articles ofvisitation, to inquire of their clergy, whether "they know of any thatuse charms, sorcery, enchantments, witchcraft, soothsaying, or anylike craft invented by the Devil. " In 1563 the King of Sweden carriedfour witches with him, as a part of his armament, to aid him in hiswars with the Danes. In 1576, seventeen or eighteen were condemned inEssex, in England. A single judge or inquisitor, Remigius, condemnedand burned nine hundred within fifteen years, from 1580 to 1595, inthe single district of Lorraine; and as many more fled out of thecountry; whole villages were depopulated, and fifteen personsdestroyed themselves rather than submit to the torture which, underthe administration of this successor of Draco and rival of Jeffries, was the first step taken in the trial of an accused person. Theapplication of the rack and other instruments of torment, in theexamination of prisoners, was recommended by him in a work onwitchcraft. He observes that "scarcely any one was known to be broughtto repentance and confession but by these means"!

The most eminent persons of the sixteenth century were believers inthe popular superstition respecting the existence of compacts betweenSatan and human beings, and in the notions associated with it. Theexcellent Melancthon was an interpreter of dreams and caster ofnativities. Luther was a strenuous supporter of the doctrine ofwitchcraft, and seems to have seriously believed that he had hadfrequent interviews with the arch-enemy himself, and had disputed withhim on points of theology, face to face. In his "Table-Talk, " he givesthe following account of his intimacy with the Devil: speaking of hisconfinement in the Castle of Wartburg, he says, "Among other thingsthey brought me hazel-nuts, which I put into a box, and sometimes Iused to crack and eat of them. In the night-times, my gentleman, theDevil, came and got the nuts out of the box, and cracked them againstone of the bedposts, making a very great noise and rumbling about mybed; but I regarded him nothing at all: when afterwards I began toslumber, then he kept such a racket and rumbling upon the chamberstairs, as if many empty barrels and hogsheads had been tumbled down. "Kepler, whose name is immortalized by being associated with the lawshe discovered that regulate the orbits of the heavenly bodies, was azealous advocate of astrology; and his great predecessor and master, the Prince of Astronomers, as he is called, Tycho Brahe, kept an idiotin his presence, fed him from his own table, with his own hand, andlistened to his incoherent, unmeaning, and fatuous expressions as to arevelation from the spiritual world. 

The following is the language addressed to Queen Elizabeth by BishopJewell. He was one of the most learned persons of his age, and is tothis day regarded as the mighty champion of the Church of England, andof the cause of the Reformation in Great Britain. He was the terriblefoe of Roman-Catholic superstition. "It may please Your Grace, " sayshe, "to understand that witches and sorcerers within these four lastyears are marvellously increased within Your Grace's realm; YourGrace's subjects pine away even unto the death; their color fadeth, their flesh rotteth, their speech is benumbed, their senses arebereft. I pray God, " continues the courtly preacher, "they neverpractise further than upon the subject. " The petition of the politeprelate appears to have been answered. The virgin queen resistedinexorably the arts of all charmers, and is thought never to have beenbewitched in her life. 

It is probable that Spenser, in his "Faërie Queen, " has described withaccuracy the witch of the sixteenth century in the following beautifullines:--

 "There, in a gloomy hollow glen, she found A little cottage built of sticks and weedes, In homely wise, and wald with sods around, In which a witch did dwell in loathly weedes And wilful want, all careless of her needes; So choosing solitarie to abide Far from all neighbors, that her devilish deedes And hellish arts from people she might hide, And hurt far off unknowne whomever she envide. "

So prone were some to indulge in the contemplation of the agency ofthe Devil and his myrmidons, that they strained, violated, andperverted the language of Scripture to make it speak of them. Thusthey insisted that the word "Philistines" meant confederates andsubjects of the Devil, and accordingly interpreted the expression, "Iwill deliver you into the hands of the Philistines, " thus, "I willdeliver you into the hands of demons. "

I cannot describe the extent to which the superstition we arereviewing was carried about the close of the sixteenth century instronger language than the following, from a candid and learned FrenchRoman-Catholic historian: "So great folly, " says he, "did thenoppress the miserable world, that Christians believed greaterabsurdities than could ever be imposed upon the heathens. "

 * * * * *

We have now arrived at the commencement of the seventeenth century, within which the prosecutions for witchcraft took place in Salem. Toshow the opinions of the clergy of the English Church at this time, Iwill quote the following curious canon, made by the convocation in1603:--

"That no minister or ministers, without license and direction of thebishop, under his hand and seal obtained, attempt, upon any pretencewhatsoever, either of possession or obsession, by fasting and prayer, to cast out any devil or devils, under pain of the imputation ofimposture or cozenage, and deposition from the ministry. " In the sameyear, licenses were actually granted, as required above, by the Bishopof Chester; and several ministers were duly authorized by him to castout devils!

During this whole century, there were trials and executions forwitchcraft in all civilized countries. More than two hundred werehanged in England, thousands were burned in Scotland, and still largernumbers in various parts of Europe. 

Edward Fairfax, the poet, was one of the most accomplished men inEngland. He is celebrated as the translator of Tasso's "JerusalemDelivered, " in allusion to which work Collins thus speaks of him:--

 "How have I sate, while piped the pensive wind, To hear thy harp, by British Fairfax strung, Prevailing poet, whose undoubting mind Believed the magic wonders that he sung. "

This same Fairfax prosecuted six of his neighbors for bewitching hischildren. The trials took place about the time the first pilgrims cameto America. 

In 1634, Urbain Grandier, a very learned and eminent French minister, rendered himself odious to the bigoted nuns of Loudun, by hismoderation towards heretics. Secretly instigated, as has beensupposed, by Cardinal Richelieu, against whom he had written a satire, they pretended to be bewitched by him, and procured his prosecution:he was tortured upon the rack until he swooned, and then was burned atthe stake. In 1640, Dr. Lamb, of London, was murdered in the streetsof that city by the mob, on suspicion of witchcraft. Several werehanged in England, only a few years before the proceedings commencedin Salem. Some were tried by water ordeal, and drowned in the process, in Suffolk, Essex, Cambridgeshire, and Northamptonshire, at the verytime the executions were going on here; and a considerable number ofcapital punishments took place in various parts of Great Britain, someyears after the prosecution had ceased in America. 

The trials and executions in England and Scotland were attended bycircumstances as painful, as barbarous, and in all respects asdisgraceful, as those occurring in Salem. Every species of tortureseems to have been resorted to: the principles of reason, justice, and humanity were set at defiance, and the whole body of the peoplekept in a state of the most fierce excitement against the sufferers. Indeed, there is nothing more distressing in the contemplation ofthese sanguinary proceedings than the spirit of deliberate andunmitigated cruelty with which they were conducted. No symptoms ofpity, compassion, or sympathy, appear to have been manifested by thejudges or the community. The following account of the expensesattending the execution of two persons convicted of witchcraft inScotland, shows in what a cool, business-like style the affair wasmanaged:--

"For ten loads of coal, to burn them £3 6 8For a tar barrel 0 14 0For towes 0 6 0For hurden to be jumps for them 3 10 0For making of them 0 8 0For one to go to Finmouth for the Laird to sit upon their assize as judge 0 6 0For the executioner for his pains 8 14 0For his expenses here 0 16 4"

The brutalizing effects of capital punishments are clearly seen inthese, as in all other instances. They gradually impart a feeling ofindifference to the value of human life, or to the idea of cutting itoff by the hand of violence, to all who become accustomed to thespectacle. In various ways they exercise influences upon the tone andtemper of society, which cannot but be regarded with regret by thecitizen, the legislator, the moralist, the philanthropist, and theChristian. 

Sinclair, in his work called "Satan's Invisible World Discovered, "gives the following affecting declaration made by one of theconfessing witches, as she was on her way to the stake:--

 "Now all you that see me this day know that I am now to die as a witch by my own confession; and I free all men, especially the ministers and magistrates, of the guilt of my blood; I take it wholly upon myself, my blood be upon my own head: and, as I must make answer to the God of heaven presently, I declare I am as free of witchcraft as any child; but, being delated by a malicious woman, and put in prison under the name of a witch, disowned by my husband and friends, and seeing no ground of hope of my coming out of prison, or ever coming in credit again, through the temptation of the Devil, I made up that confession on purpose to destroy my own life, being weary of it, and choosing rather to die than live. "

Sir George Mackenzie says that he went to examine some women who hadconfessed, and that one of them, who was a silly creature, told him, "under secresie, " "that she had not confessed because she was guilty, but, being a poor creature, who wrought for her meat, and beingdefamed for a witch, she knew she would starve, for no personthereafter would either give her meat or lodging, and that all menwould beat her, and hound dogs at her, and that therefore she desiredto be out of the world. " Whereupon she wept most bitterly, and, uponher knees, called God to witness to what she said. 

A wretch, named Matthew Hopkins, rendered himself infamouslyconspicuous in the prosecutions for witchcraft that took place in thecounties of Essex, Sussex, Norfolk, and Huntingdon, in England, in theyears 1645 and 1646. The title he assumed indicates the part he acted:it was "Witch-finder-general. " He travelled from place to place; hisexpenses were paid; and he required, in addition, regular fees for thediscovery of a witch. Besides pricking the body to find thewitch-mark, he compelled the wretched and decrepit victims of hiscruel practices to sit in a painful posture, on an elevated stool, with their limbs crossed; and, if they persevered in refusing toconfess, he would prolong their torture, in some cases, to more thantwenty-four hours. He would prevent their going to sleep, and dragthem about barefoot over the rough ground, thus overcoming them withextreme weariness and pain: but his favorite method was to tie thethumb of the right hand close to the great toe of the left foot, anddraw them through a river or pond; if they floated, as they would belikely to do, while their heavier limbs were thus sustained andupborne by the rope, it was considered as conclusive proof of theirguilt. This monster was encouraged and sanctioned by the government;and he procured the death, in one year and in one county, of more thanthree times as many as suffered in Salem during the whole delusion. He and his exploits are referred to in the following lines, from thatstorehouse of good sense and keen wit, Butler's "Hudibras:"--

 "Hath not this present Parliament A leiger to the Devil sent, Fully empowered to treat about Finding revolted witches out? And has he not within a year Hanged threescore of them in one shire?"

The infatuated people looked upon this Hopkins with admiration andastonishment, and could only account for his success by thesupposition, which, we are told, was generally entertained, that hehad stolen the memorandum-book in which Satan had recorded the namesof all the persons in England who were in league with him!

The most melancholy circumstance connected with the history of thiscreature is, that Richard Baxter and Edmund Calamy--names dear andvenerable in the estimation of all virtuous and pious men--weredeceived and deluded by him: they countenanced his conduct, followedhim in his movements, and aided him in his proceedings. 

At length, however, some gentlemen, shocked at the cruelty andsuspicious of the integrity of Hopkins, seized him, tied his thumbsand toes together, threw him into a pond, and dragged him about totheir hearts' content. They were fully satisfied with the result ofthe experiment. It was found that he did not sink. He stood condemnedon his own principles; and thus the country was rescued from thepower of the malicious impostor. 

Among the persons whose death Hopkins procured, was a venerable, gray-headed clergyman, named Lewis. He was of the Church of England, had been the minister of a congregation for more than half a century, and was over eighty years of age. His infirm frame was subjected tothe customary tests, even to the trial by water ordeal: he wascompelled to walk almost incessantly for several days and nights, until, in the exhaustion of his nature, he yielded assent to aconfession that was adduced against him in Court; which, however, hedisowned and denied there and at all times, from the moment of releasefrom the torments, by which it had been extorted, to his last breath. As he was about to die the death of a felon, he knew that the rites ofsepulture, according to the forms of his denomination, would be deniedto his remains. The aged sufferer, it is related, read his own funeralservice while on the scaffold. Solemn, sublime, and affecting as arepassages of this portion of the ritual of the Church, surely it wasnever performed under circumstances so well suited to impress with aweand tenderness as when uttered by the calumniated, oppressed, anddying old man. Baxter had been tried for sedition, on the ground thatone of his publications contained a reflection upon Episcopacy, andwas imprisoned for two years. It is a striking and melancholyillustration of the moral infirmity of human nature, that the authorof the "Saints' Everlasting Rest, " and the "Call to the Unconverted, "permitted such a vengeful feeling against the Establishment to enterhis breast, that he took pleasure, and almost exulted, in relating thefate of this innocent and aged clergyman, whom he denominates, inderision, a "Reading Parson. "

Baxter's writings are pervaded by his belief in all sorts ofsupernatural things. In the "Saints' Everlasting Rest, " he declareshis conviction of the reality and authenticity of stories of ghosts, apparitions, haunted houses, &c. He placed full faith in a tale, current among the people of his day, of the "dispossession of theDevil out of many persons together in a room in Lancashire, at theprayer of some godly ministers. " In his "Dying Thoughts, " he says, "Ihave had many convincing proofs of witches, the contracts they havemade with devils, and the power which they have received from them;"and he seems to have credited the most absurd fables ever invented onthe subject by ignorance, folly, or fraud. 

The case to which he refers, as one of the "dispossession of devils, "may be found in a tract published in London in 1697, entitled, "TheSurey Demoniac; or, an Account of Satan's strange and dreadfulactings, in and about the body of Richard Dugdale, of Surey, nearWhalley, in Lancashire. And how he was dispossessed by God's blessingon the Fastings and Prayers of divers Ministers and People. The matterof fact attested by the oaths of several creditable persons, beforesome of his Majestie's Justices of the Peace in the said county. " The"London Monthly Repository" (vol. V. , 1810) describes the affair asfollows: "These dreadful actings of Satan continued above a year;during which there was a desperate struggle between him and nineministers of the gospel, who had undertaken to cast him out, and, forthat purpose, successively relieved each other in their daily combatswith him: while Satan tried all his arts to baffle their attempts, insulting them with scoffs and raillery, puzzling them sometimes withGreek and Latin, and threatening them with the effects of hisvengeance, till he was finally vanquished and put to flight by thepersevering prayers and fastings of the said ministers. "

No name in English history is regarded with more respect andadmiration, by wise and virtuous men, than that of Sir Matthew Hale. His character was almost venerated by our ancestors; and it has beenthought that it was the influence of his authority, more than anything else, that prevailed upon them to pursue the course they adoptedin the prosecutions at Salem. This great and good man presided, asLord Chief Baron, at the trial of two females, --Amy Dunny and RoseCullender, --at Bury St. Edmunds, in Suffolk, in the year 1664. Theywere convicted and executed. 

Baxter relates the following circumstance as having occurred at thistrial: "A godly minister, yet living, sitting by to see one of thegirls (who appeared as a witness against the prisoners) in her fits, suddenly felt a force pull one of the hooks from his breeches; and, while he looked with wonder at what was become of it, the tormentedgirl vomited it up out of her mouth. "

To give an idea of the nature of the testimony upon which theprincipal stress was laid by the government, I will extract thefollowing passages from the report of the trial: "Robert Sherringhamtestified that the axle-tree of his cart, happening, in passing, tobreak some part of Rose Cullender's house, in her anger at it, shevehemently threatened him his horses should suffer for it; and, withina short time, all his four horses died; after which he sustained manyother losses, in the sudden dying of his cattle. He was also takenwith a lameness in his limbs, and so far vexed with lice of anextraordinary number and bigness, that no art could hinder theswarming of them, till he burned up two suits of apparel. "--"MargaretArnold testified that Amy Dunny afflicted her children: they (thechildren), she said, would see mice running round the house, and, whenthey caught them and threw them into the fire, they would screech outlike rats. "--"A thing like a bee flew at the face of the youngerchild; the child fell into a fit, and at last vomited up a two-pennynail, with a broad head, affirming that the bee brought this nail, andforced it into her mouth. "--"She one day caught an invisible mouse, and, throwing it into the fire, it flashed like to gunpowder. Nonebesides the child saw the mouse, but every one saw the flash!"

In this instance we perceive the influence of prejudice in pervertingevidence. The circumstance that the mouse was invisible to all eyesbut those of the child ought to have satisfied the Court and jury thatshe was either under the power of a delusion or practising animposture. But, as they were predisposed to find somethingsupernatural in the transaction, their minds seized upon the pretendedinvisibility of the mouse as conclusive proof of diabolical agency. 

Many persons who were present expressed the opinion, that the issue ofthe trial would have been favorable to the prisoners, had it not beenfor the following circumstance: Sir Thomas Browne, a physician, philosopher, and scholar of unrivalled celebrity at that time, happened to be upon the spot; and it was the universal wish that heshould be called to the stand, and his opinion be obtained on thegeneral subject of witchcraft. An enthusiastic contemporary admirer ofSir Thomas Browne thus describes him: "The horizon of hisunderstanding was much larger than the hemisphere of the world: allthat was visible in the heavens he comprehended so well, that few thatare under them knew so much; and of the earth he had such a minute andexact geographical knowledge as if he had been by Divine Providenceordained surveyor-general of the whole terrestrial globe and itsproducts, minerals, plants, and animals. " His memory is stated to havebeen inferior only to that of Seneca or Scaliger; and he was reputedmaster of seven languages. Dr. Johnson, who has written his biography, sums up his character in the following terms: "But it is not on thepraises of others, but on his own writings, that he is to depend forthe esteem of posterity, of which he will not easily be deprived, while learning shall have any reverence among men: for there is noscience in which he does not discover some skill; and scarce any kindof knowledge, profane or sacred, abstruse or elegant, which he doesnot appear to have cultivated with success. "

Sir Thomas Browne was considered by those of his own generation tohave made great advances beyond the wisdom of his age. He claimed thecharacter of a reformer, and gave to his principal publication thetitle of an "Enquiry into Vulgar Errors. " So bold and free were hisspeculations, that he was looked upon invidiously by many as a daringinnovator, and did not escape the denunciatory imputation of heresy. Nothing could be more unjust, however, than this latter charge. He wasa most ardent and zealous believer in the doctrines of the EstablishedChurch. He declares "that he assumes the honorable style of aChristian, " not because "it is the religion of his country, " butbecause, "having in his riper years and confirmed judgment seen andexamined all, he finds himself obliged, by the principles of grace andthe law of his own reason, to embrace no other name but this. " Heexults and "blesses himself, that he lived not in the days ofmiracles, when faith had been thrust upon him, but enjoys that greaterblessing pronounced to all that believed, and saw not:" nay, he goesso far as to say, that they only had the advantage "of a bold andnoble faith, who lived before the coming of the Saviour, and, uponobscure prophecies and mystical types, could raise a belief. " The factthat such a man was accused of infidelity is an affecting proof of theinjustice that is sometimes done by the judgment of contemporaries. 

This prodigy of learning and philosophy went into Court, took thestand, and declared his opinion in favor of the reality of witchcraft, entered into a particular discussion of the subject before the jury, threw the whole weight of his great name into the wavering scales ofjustice, and the poor women were convicted. The authority of SirThomas Browne, added to the other evidence, perplexed Sir MatthewHale. A reporter of the trial says, "that it made this great and goodman doubtful; but he was in such fears, and proceeded with suchcaution, that he would not so much as sum up the evidence, but left itto the jury with prayers, 'that the great God of heaven would directtheir hearts in that weighty matter. '"

The result of this important trial established decisively theinterpretation of English law; and the printed report of it was usedas an authoritative text-book in the Court at Salem. 

The celebrated Robert Boyle flourished in the latter half of theseventeenth century. He is allowed by all to have done much towardsthe introduction of an improved philosophy, and the promotion ofexperimental science. But he could not entirely shake off thesuperstition of his age. 

A small city in Burgundy, called Mascon, was famous in the annals ofwitchcraft. In a work called "The Theatre of God's Judgments, "published, in London, by Thomas Beard in 1612, there is the followingpassage: "It was a very lamentable spectacle that chanced to theGovernor of Mascon, a magician, whom the Devil snatched up indinner-while, and hoisted aloft, carrying him three times about thetown of Mascon, in the presence of many beholders, to whom he cried inthis manner, 'Help, help, my friends!' so that the whole town stoodamazed thereat; yea, and the remembrance of this strange accidentsticketh at this day fast in the minds of all the inhabitants of thiscountry. " A malicious and bigoted monk, who discharged the office ofchief legend-maker to the Benedictine Abbey, in the vicinity ofMascon, fabricated this ridiculous story for the purpose of bringingthe Governor into disrepute. An account of another diabolicalvisitation, suggested, it is probable, by the one just described, wasissued from the press, under the title of "The Devil of Mascon, "during the lifetime of Boyle, who gave his sanction to the work, promoted its version into English, and, as late as 1678, publiclydeclared his belief of the supernatural transaction it related. 

The subject of demonology, in all its forms and phases, embracingwitchcraft, held a more commanding place throughout Europe, in theliterature of the centuries immediately preceding the eighteenth, thanany other. Works of the highest pretension, elaborate, learned, voluminous, and exhausting, were published, by the authority ofgovernments and universities, to expound it. It was regarded asoccupying the most eminent department of jurisprudence, as well as ofscience and theology. 

Raphael De La Torre and Adam Tanner published treatises establishingthe right and duty of ecclesiastical tribunals to punish all whopractised or dealt with the arts of demonology. In 1484, Sprenger cameout with his famous book, "Malleus Maleficarum;" or, the "Hammer ofWitches. " Paul Layman, in 1629, issued an elaborate work on "JudicialProcesses against Sorcerers and Witches. " The following is the titleof a bulky volume of some seven hundred pages: "Demonology, or NaturalMagic or demoniacal, lawful and unlawful, also open or secret, by theintervention and invocation of a Demon, " published in 1612. Itconsists of four books, treating of the crime of witchcraft, and itspunishment in the ordinary tribunals and the Inquisitorial office. Itsauthor was Don Francisco Torreblanca Villalpando, of Cordova, AdvocateRoyal in the courts of Grenada. It was republished in 1623, by commandof Philip III. Of Spain, on the recommendation of the Fiscal General, and with the sanction of the Royal Council and the Holy Inquisition. This work may be considered as establishing and defining thedoctrines, in reference to witchcraft, prevailing in all Catholiccountries. It was indorsed by royal, judicial, academical, andecclesiastical approval; is replete with extraordinary erudition, arranged in the most scientific form, embracing in a methodicalclassification all the minutest details of the subject, and codifyingit into a complete system of law. There was no particular in all theproceedings and all the doctrines brought out at the trials in Salem, which did not find ample justification and support in this work ofCatholic, imperial, and European authority. 

But perhaps the writer of the greatest influence on this subject inEngland and America, during the whole of the seventeenth century, wasWilliam Perkins, "the learned, pious, and painful preacher of God'sWord, at St. Andrew's, in Cambridge, " where he died, in 1602, agedforty-four years. He was quite a voluminous author; and many of hisworks were translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Spanish. Fuller, in "The Holy State, " selects him as the impersonation of thequalities requisite to "the Faithful Minister. " In his glowingeulogium upon his learning and talents, he says:--

 "He would pronounce the word _damne_ with such an emphasis as left a doleful echo in his auditors' ears a good while after. And, when catechist of Christ's College, in expounding the Commandments, applied them so home, --able almost to make his hearers' hearts fall down, and hairs to stand upright. But, in his older age, he altered his voice, and remitted much of his former rigidness, often professing that to preach mercy was that proper office of the ministers of the gospel. "--"Our Perkins brought the schools into the pulpit, and, unshelling their controversies out of their hard school-terms, made thereof plain and wholesome meat for his people; for he had a capacious head, with angles winding, and roomy enough to lodge all controversial intricacies. "--"He had a rare felicity in speedy reading of books; so that, as it were, riding post through an author, he took strict notice of all passages. Perusing books so speedily, one would think he read nothing; so accurately, one would think he read all. "

An octavo volume, written by this great scholar and divine, waspublished at Cambridge in England, under the title, "Discourse of theDamned Art of Witchcraft. " It went through several editions, and had awide and permanent circulation. 

This work, the character of which is sufficiently indicated in itsemphatic title, was the great authority on the subject with ourfathers; and Mr. Parris had a copy of it in his possession when theproceedings in reference to witchcraft began at Salem Village. 

John Gaule published an octavo volume in London, in 1646, entitled, "Select Cases of Conscience concerning Witches and Witchcraft. " He isone of the most exact writers on the subject, and arranges witches inthe following classes: "1. The diviner, gypsy, or fortune-tellingwitch; 2. The astrologian, star-gazing, planetary, prognosticatingwitch; 3. The chanting, canting, or calculating witch, who works bysigns and numbers; 4. The venefical, or poisoning witch; 5. Theexorcist, or conjuring witch; 6. The gastronomic witch; 7. Themagical, speculative, sciential, or arted witch; 8. The necromancer. "

Besides innumerable writers of this class, who spread out thescholastic learning on the subject, and presented it in a logical andtheological form, there were others who treated it in a more popularstyle, and invested it with the charms of elegant literature. HenryHallywell published an octavo in London, in 1681, in which, while themain doctrines of witchcraft as then almost universally received areenforced, an attempt was made to divest it of some of its mostrepulsive and terrible features. He gives the following account of themeans by which a person may place himself beyond the reach of thepower of witchcraft:--

 "It is possible for the soul to arise to such a height, and become so divine, that no witchcraft or evil demons can have any power upon the body. When the bodily life is too far invigorated and awakened, and draws the intellect, the flower and summity of the soul, into a conspiration with it, then are we subject and obnoxious to magical assaults. For magic or sorcery, being founded only in this lower or mundane spirit, he that makes it his business to be freed and released from all its blandishments and flattering devocations, and endeavors wholly to withdraw himself from the love of corporeity and too near a sympathy with the frail flesh, he, by it, enkindles such a divine principle as lifts him above the fate of this inferior world, and adorns his mind with such an awful majesty that beats back all enchantments, and makes the infernal fiends tremble at his presence, hating those vigorous beams of light which are so contrary and repugnant to their dark natures. "

The mind of this beautiful writer found encouragement and security inthe midst of the diabolical spirits, with whom he believed the worldto be infested, in the following views and speculations:--

 "For there is a chain of government that runs down from God, the Supreme Monarch, whose bright and piercing eyes look through all that he has made, to the lowest degree of the creation; and there are presidential angels of empires and kingdoms, and such as under them have the tutelage of private families; and, lastly, every man's particular guardian genius. Nor is the inanimate or material world left to blind chance or fortune; but there are, likewise, mighty and potent spirits, to whom is committed the guidance and care of the fluctuating and uncertain motions of it, and by their ministry, fire and vapor, storms and tempests, snow and hail, heat and cold, are all kept within such bounds and limits as are most serviceable to the ends of Providence. They take care of the variety of seasons, and superintend the tillage and fruits of the earth; upon which account, Origen calls them _invisible_ husbandmen. So that, all affairs and things being under the inspection and government of these incorporeal beings, the power of the dark kingdom and its agents is under a strict confinement and restraint; and they cannot bring a general mischief upon the world without a special permission of a superior Providence. "

Spenser has the same imagery and sentiment:--

 "How oft do they their silver bowers leave, To come to succor us, that succor want? How oft do they with golden pinions cleave The flitting skies, like flying pursuivant, Against foul fiends to aid us militant? They for us fight, they watch and duly ward, And their bright squadrons round about us plant, And all for love and nothing for reward: Oh! why should heavenly God to man have such regard?"

While there can be no doubt that the superstitious opinions we havebeen reviewing were diffused generally among the great body of thepeople of all ranks and conditions, it would be unjust to truth not tomention that there were some persons who looked upon them as emptyfables and vain imaginations. Error has never yet made a complete anduniversal conquest. In the darkest ages and most benighted regions, ithas been found impossible utterly to extinguish the light of reason. There always have been some in whose souls the torch of truth has beenkept burning with vestal watchfulness: we can discern its glimmer hereand there through the deepest night that has yet settled upon theearth. In the midst of the most extravagant superstition, there havebeen individuals who have disowned the popular belief, and consideredit a mark of wisdom and true philosophy to discard the idle fanciesand absurd schemes of faith that possessed the minds of the great massof their contemporaries. This was the case with Horace, as appearsfrom lines thus quite freely but effectively translated:--

 "These dreams and terrors magical, These miracles and witches, Night-walking spirites or Thessal bugs, Esteeme them not two rushes. "

The intellect of Seneca also rose above the reach of the popularcredulity with respect to the agency of supernatural beings and theefficacy of mysterious charms. 

If we could but obtain access to the secret thoughts of the wisestphilosophers and of the men of genius of antiquity, we should probablyfind that many of them were superior to the superstitions of theirtimes. Even in the thick darkness of the dark ages, there were mindstoo powerful to be kept in chains by error and delusion. 

Henry Cornelius Agrippa, who was born in the latter part of thefifteenth century, was, perhaps, the greatest philosopher and scholarof his period. In early life, he was very much devoted to the scienceof magic, and was a strenuous supporter of demonology and witchcraft. In the course of his studies and meditations, he was led to a changeof views on these subjects, and did all that he could to warn othersfrom putting confidence in such vain, frivolous, and absurdsuperstitions as then possessed the world. The consequence was, thathe was denounced and prosecuted as a conjurer, and charged with havingwritten against magic and witchcraft, in order the more securely toshelter himself from the suspicion of practising them. As an instanceof the calumnies that were heaped upon him, I would mention thatPaulus Jovius asserted that "Cornelius Agrippa went always accompaniedwith an evil spirit in the similitude of a black dog;" and that, whenthe time of his death drew near, "he took off the enchanted collarfrom the dog's neck, and sent him away with these terms, 'Get theehence, thou cursed beast, which hast utterly destroyed me:' neitherwas the dog ever seen after. " Butler, in his "Hudibras, " has notneglected to celebrate this remarkable connection between Satan andthe man of learning:--

 "Agrippa kept a Stygian pug I' th' garb and habit of a dog, That was his tutor; and the cur Read to th' occult philosopher. "

John Wierus wrote an elaborate, learned, and judicious book, in whichhe treated at large of magic, sorcery, and witchcraft, and did allthat scholarship, talent, and philosophy could do to undermine andsubvert the whole system of the prevailing popular superstition. Buthe fared no better than his predecessor, patron, and master, Agrippa;for, like him, he was accused of having attempted to persuade theworld that there was no reality in supernatural charms and diabolicalconfederacies, in order that he might devote himself to them withoutsuspicion or molestation, and was borne down by the bigotry andfanaticism of his times. 

King James merely gave utterance to the general sentiment, andpronounced the verdict of popular opinion, in the following extractfrom the preface to his "Demonologie:" "Wierus, a German physician, sets out a public apologie for all these crafts-folkes, whereby, procuring for them impunitie, he plainly bewrays himself to have beenof that profession. "

In 1584, a quarto volume was published in London, the work of ReginaldScott, a learned English gentleman, whose title sufficiently indicatesits import, "The Discovery of Witchcraft, wherein the lewde dealingof witches and witchmongers is notably detected; the knavery ofconjurers, the impiety of inchanters, the folly of soothsayers, theimpudent falsehood of cozeners, the infidelity of atheists, thepestilent practices of pythonists, the curiosities of figure-casters, the vanity of dreamers, the beggarly art of alcumstrie, theabomination of idolatrie, the horrible art of poisoning, the virtueand power of natural magic, and all the conveniencies of legerdemaineand juggling, are discovered, &c. "

In 1599, Samuel Harsnett, Archbishop of York, wrote a work, publishedin London, to expose certain persons who pretended to have the powerof casting out devils, and detecting their "deceitful trade. " Thiswriter was among the first to bring the power of bold satire and opendenunciation to bear against the superstitions of demonology. He thusdescribes the motives and the methods of such impostors:--

 "Out of these, " saith he, "is shaped us the true idea of a witch, --an old, weather-beaten crone, having her chin and her knees meeting for age, walking like a bow, leaning on a staff; hollow-eyed, untoothed, furrowed on her face, having her limbs trembling with the palsy, going mumbling in the streets; one that hath forgotten her Pater-noster, and yet hath a shrewd tongue to call a drab a drab. If she hath learned of an old wife, in a chimney-end, Pax, Max, Fax, for a spell, or can say Sir John Grantham's curse for the miller's eels, 'All ye that have stolen the miller's eels, Laudate dominum de coelis: and all they that have consented thereto, Benedicamus domino:' why then, beware! look about you, my neighbors. If any of you have a sheep sick of the giddies, or a hog of the mumps, or a horse of the staggers, or a knavish boy of the school, or an idle girl of the wheel, or a young drab of the sullens, and hath not fat enough for her porridge, or butter enough for her bread, and she hath a little help of the epilepsy or cramp, to teach her to roll her eyes, wry her mouth, gnash her teeth, startle with her body, hold her arms and hands stiff, &c. ; and then, when an old Mother Nobs hath by chance called her an idle young housewife, or bid the Devil scratch her, then no doubt but Mother Nobs is the witch, and the young girl is owl blasted, &c. They that have their brains baited and their fancies distempered with the imaginations and apprehensions of witches, conjurers, and fairies, and all that lymphatic chimera, I find to be marshalled in one of these five ranks: children, fools, women, cowards, sick or black melancholic discomposed wits. "

In 1669, a work was published in London with the following title: "TheQuestion of Witchcraft Debated; or, a Discourse against their Opinionsthat affirm Witches. " It is a work of great merit, and would do honorto a scholar and logician of the present day. The author was JohnWagstaffe, of Oxford University: he is described as a crooked, shrivelled, little man, of a most despicable appearance. Thiscircumstance, together with his writings against the popular belief inwitchcraft, led his academical associates to accuse him, some of themin sport, but others with grave suspicion, of being a wizard. Wood, the historian of Oxford, says that "he died in a manner distracted, occasioned by a deep conceit of his own parts, and by a continualbibbing of strong and high-tasted liquors. " But poor Wagstaffe wasassailed by something more than private raillery and slander. Hisheretical sentiments exposed him to the battery of the host of writerswho will always be found ready to advocate a prevailing opinion. ButWagstaffe was not left entirely alone to defend the cause of reasonand truth. He had one most zealous advocate and ardent admirer in theauthor of a work on "The Doctrine of Devils, " published in 1676. Thiswriter sums up a panegyric upon Wagstaffe's performance, bypronouncing it "a judicious book, that contains more good reason, truereligion, and right Christianity, than all those lumps and cartloadsof luggage that hath been fardled up by all the faggeters ofdemonologistical winter-tales, and witchcraftical legendaries, sincethey first began to foul clean paper. "

Dr. Balthasar Bekker, of Amsterdam, who was equally eminent inastronomy, philosophy, and theology, published in 1691 a learned andpowerful work, called "The World Bewitched, " in which he openlyassailed the doctrines of witchcraft and of the Devil, and anticipatedmany of the views and arguments presented in Farmer's excellentpublications. As a reward for his exertions to enlighten hisfellow-creatures, he was turned out of the ministry, and assaulted bynearly all the writers of his age. 

Dr. Bekker was one of the ablest and boldest writers of his day, anddid much to advance the cause of natural science, scripturalinterpretation, and the principles of enlightened Christianity. In1680 he published an "Inquiry concerning Comets, " rescuing them fromthe realm of superstition, placing them within the natural physicallaws, and exploding the then-received opinion, that, in any way, theyare the presages or forerunners of evil. His "Exposition on theProphet Daniel" gives proof of his learning and judgment. His greatmerits were recognized by John Locke and Richard Bentley. In thepreface to his "World Bewitched, " he says, that it grieved him to seethe great honors, powers, and miracles which are ascribed to theDevil. "It has come to that pass, " to use his own language, "that menthink it piety and godliness to ascribe a great many wonders to theDevil, and impiety and heresy, if a man will not believe that theDevil can do what a thousand persons say he does. It is now reckonedgodliness, if a man who fears God fear also the Devil. If he be notafraid of the Devil, he passes for an atheist, who does not believe inGod, because he cannot think that there are two gods, the one good, the other bad. But these, I think, with much more reason, may becalled ditheists. For my part, if, on account of my opinion, they willgive me a new name, let them call me a monotheist, a believer of butone God. " The work struck down the whole system of demonology andwitchcraft, by proving that there never was really such a thing assorcery or possession, and that devils have no influence over humanaffairs or the persons of men. It is not surprising that it raised agreat clamor. The wonder is that it did not cost him his life. It isprobable that his protection was the confidence the people had in hischaracter and learning. Attempts were made to diminish thatconfidence, and bring him into odium, by levelling against him everyform of abuse. A medal was struck, and extensively circulated, representing the Devil, clothed like a minister or priest, riding onan ass. The device was so arranged as to excite ridicule andabhorrence, in the vulgar mind, against Bekker. But it was foundimpossible to turn the popular feeling, which had set in his favor;and his persecutors and defamers were completely baffled. He wasfollowed, soon after, by the learned Thomasius, whose writings againstdemonology produced a decided effect upon the convictions of the age. 

While Bekker, and the other writers of his class, endeavored tooverthrow the superstitious practices and fancies then prevalentrespecting demonology and communications with spiritual beings, theyso far acceded to the popular theology as to maintain the doctrine ofthe personality of the Devil. They believed in the existence of thearch-fiend, but denied his agency in human affairs. They held that hewas kept confined "to bottomless perdition, there to dwell--

 "In adamantine chains and penal fire. "

Sir Robert Filmer, in 1680, published "An Advertisement to the jurymenof England, touching Witches, " in which he criticised and condemnedmany of the opinions and methods then countenanced on the subject. 

But Bekker, Thomasius, and Filmer appeared too late to operate uponthe prevalent opinions of Europe or America prior to the witchcraftdelusion of 1692. The productions of the other writers, in the samedirection, to whom I have referred, probably had a very limitedcirculation, and made at the time but little impression. Error isseldom overthrown by mere reasoning. It yields only to the logic ofevents. No power of learning or wit could have rooted the witchcraftsuperstitions out of the minds of men. Nothing short of ademonstration of their deformities, follies, and horrors, such as herewas held up to the view of the world, could have given theirdeath-blow. This was the final cause of Salem Witchcraft, and makes itone of the great landmarks in the world's history. 

A full and just view of the position and obligations of the personswho took part in the transactions at Salem requires a previousknowledge of the principles and the state of the law, as it was thenin force and understood by the courts, and all concerned in judicialproceedings. Although the ancients did not regard pretendedintercourse between magicians and enchanters and spiritual beings asnecessarily or always criminal, we find that they enacted laws againstthe abuse of the power supposed to result from the connection. The oldRoman code of the Twelve Tables contained the following prohibition:"That they should not bewitch the fruits of the earth, nor use anycharms, to draw their neighbor's corn into their own fields. " Therewere several special edicts on the subject during the existence ofthe Roman State. In the early Christian councils, sorcery wasfrequently made the object of denunciation. At Laodicea, for instance, in the year 364, it was voted to excommunicate any clergymen who weremagicians, enchanters, astrologers, or mathematicians! The Bull ofPope Innocent VIII. , near the close of the fifteenth century, hasalready been mentioned. 

Dr. Turner, in his history of the Anglo-Saxons, says that they hadlaws against sorcerers and witches, but that they did not punish themwith death. There was an English statute against witchcraft, in thereign of Henry VIII. , and another in that of Elizabeth. 

Up to this time, however, the legislation of parliament on the subjectwas merciful and judicious: for it did not attach to the guilt ofwitchcraft the punishment of death, unless it had been used to destroylife; that is, unless it had become murder. 

On the demise of Elizabeth, James of Scotland ascended the throne. Hispedantic and eccentric character is well known. He had an early anddecided inclination towards abstruse or mysterious speculations. Before he had reached his twentieth year, he undertook to accomplishwhat only the most sanguine and profound theologians have ever daredto attempt: he expounded the Book of Revelation. When he was abouttwenty-five years of age, he published a work on the "Doctrine ofDevils and Witchcraft. " Not long after, he succeeded to the Britishcrown. It may easily be imagined that the subject of demonology soonbecame a fashionable and prevailing topic of conversation in the royalsaloons and throughout the nation. It served as a medium through whichobsequious courtiers could convey their flattery to the ears of theiraccomplished and learned sovereign. His Majesty's book was reprintedand extensively circulated. It was of course praised and recommendedin all quarters. 

The parliament, actuated by a base desire to compliment the vain andsuperstitious king, enacted a new and much more severe statute againstwitchcraft, in the very first year of his reign. It was under this lawthat so many persons here and in England were deprived of their lives. The blood of hundreds of innocent persons was thus unrighteously shed. It was a fearful price which these servile lawgivers paid for thefavor of their prince. 

But this was not the only mischief brought about by courtly deferenceto the prejudices of King James. It was under his direction that ourpresent translation of the Scriptures was made. To please His RoyalMajesty, and to strengthen the arguments in his work on demonology, the word "witch" was used to represent expressions in the originalHebrew, that conveyed an entirely different idea; and it was freelyinserted in the headings of the chapters. [B] A person having "afamiliar spirit" was a favorite description of a witch in the king'sbook. The translators, forgetful of their high and solemn function, endeavored to establish this definition by inserting it into theirversion. Accordingly, they introduced it in several places; in theeleventh verse of the eighteenth chapter of Deuteronomy, for instance, "a consulter with familiar spirits. " There is no word in the Hebrewwhich corresponds with "familiar. " And this is the important, theessential word in the definition. It conveys the idea of alliance, stated connection, confederacy, or compact, which is characteristicand distinctive of a witch. The expression in the original signifies"a consulter with spirits, "--especially, as was the case with the"Witch of Endor, " a consulter with departed spirits. It was a shockingperversion of the word of God, for the purpose of flattering a frailand mortal sovereign! King James lived to see and acknowledge theerror of his early opinions, and he would gladly have counteractedtheir bad effect; but it is easier to make laws and translations thanit is to alter and amend them. 

[Footnote B: For a thorough discussion of the several Hebrew wordsthat relate to Divination and Magic, see Wierus de Præstigiis, L. 2, c. 1. ]

While the law of the land required the capital punishment of witches, no blame ought to be attached to judges and jurors for dischargingtheir respective duties in carrying it into execution. It will not dofor us to assert, that they ought to have refused, let theconsequences to themselves have been what they would, to sanction andgive effect to such inhuman and unreasonable enactments. We cannotconsistently take this ground; for there is nothing more certain thanthat, with their notions, our ancestors had at least as good reasonsto advance in favor of punishing witchcraft with death, as we have forpunishing any crime whatsoever in the same awful and summary manner. We appeal, in defence of our capital punishments, to the text ofMoses, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed. "The apologist of our fathers, for carrying into effect the law makingwitchcraft a capital offence, tells us in reply, in the first place, that this passage is not of the nature of a precept, but merely of anadmonition; that it does not enjoin any particular method ofproceeding, but simply describes the natural consequences of cruel andcontentious conduct; and that it amounts only to this: thatquarrelsome, violent, and bloodthirsty persons will be apt to meet thesame fate they bring upon others; that the duellist will be likely tofall in private combat, the ambitious conqueror to perish, and thewarlike nation to be destroyed, on the field of battle. If this is notconsidered by us a sufficient and satisfactory answer, he advances toour own ground, points to the same text where we place our defence, and puts his finger on the following plain and authoritative precept:"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. " Indeed we must acknowledge, that the capital punishment of witches is as strongly supported andfortified by the Scriptures of the Old Testament--at least, as theyappear in our present version--as the capital punishment of any crimewhatever. 

If we adopt another line of argument, and say that it is necessary topunish some particular crimes with death, in order to maintain thesecurity of society, or hold up an impressive warning to others, herealso we find that our opponent has full as much to offer in defence ofour fathers as can be offered in our own defence. He describes to usthe tremendous and infernal power which was universally believed bythem to be possessed by a witch; a power which, as it was not derivedfrom a natural source, could not easily be held in check by naturalrestraints: neither chains nor dungeons could bind it down or confineit. You might load the witch with irons, you might bury her in thelowest cell of a feudal prison, and still it was believed that shecould send forth her imps or her spectre to ravage the fields, andblight the meadows, and throw the elements into confusion, and torturethe bodies, and craze the minds, of any who might be the objects ofher malice. 

Shakspeare, in the description which he puts into the mouth of Macbethof the supernatural energy of witchcraft, does not surpass, if he doesjustice to, the prevailing belief on the subject:--

 "I conjure you, by that which you profess, (Howe'er you came to know it) answer me, -- Though you untie the winds, and let them fight Against the churches; though the yesty waves Confound and swallow navigation up; Though bladed corn be lodged, and trees blown down; Though castles topple on their warders' heads; Though palaces and pyramids do slope Their heads to their foundations; though the treasure Of nature's germins tumble all together, Even till destruction sicken, --answer me To what I ask you. "

There was indeed an almost infinite power to do mischief associatedwith a disposition to do it. No human strength could strip the witchof these mighty energies while she lived; nothing but death coulddestroy them. There was, as our ancestors considered, incontestableevidence, that she had put them forth to the injury, loss, and perhapsdeath, of others. 

Can it be wondered at, that, under such circumstances, the lawconnecting capital punishment with the guilt of witchcraft wasresorted to as the only means to protect society, and warn others fromentering into the dark, wicked, and malignant compact?

It is not probable that even King James's Parliament would have beenwilling to go to the length of Selden in his "Table-Talk, " who takesthis ground in defence of the capital punishment of witches. "The lawagainst witches does not prove there be any, but it punishes themalice of those people that use such means to take away men's lives. If one should profess, that, by turning his hat thrice and crying'Buzz, ' he could take away a man's life (though in truth he could dono such thing), yet this were a just law made by the State, thatwhoever should turn his hat thrice and cry 'Buzz, ' with an intentionto take away a man's life, shall be put to death. "

There are other considerations that deserve to be weighed before afinal judgment should be made up respecting the conduct of our fathersin the witchcraft delusion. Among these is the condition of physicalscience in their day. But little knowledge of the laws of nature waspossessed, and that little was confined to a few. The world was still, to the mass of the people, almost as full of mystery in its physicaldepartments as it was to its first inhabitants. Politics, poetry, rhetoric, ethics, and history had been cultivated to a great extent inprevious ages; but the philosophy of the natural and material worldwas almost unknown. Astronomy, chemistry, optics, pneumatics, and evengeography, were involved in the general darkness and error. Some ofour most important sciences, such as electricity, date their originfrom a later period. 

This remarkable tardiness in the progress of physical science for sometime after the era of the revival of learning is to be accounted forby referring to the erroneous methods of reasoning and observationthen prevalent in the world. A false logic was adopted in the schoolsof learning and philosophy. The great instrument for the discovery andinvestigation of truth was the syllogism, the most absurd contrivanceof the human mind; an argumentative process whose conclusion iscontained in the premises; a method of proof, in the first step ofwhich the matter to be proved is taken for granted. [C] In a word, thewhole system of philosophy was made up of hypotheses, and the onlyfoundation of science was laid in conjecture. The imagination, callednecessarily into extraordinary action, in the absence of scientificcertainty, was still further exercised in vain attempts to discover, unassisted by observation and experiment, the elements and firstprinciples of nature. It had reached a monstrous growth about the timeto which we are referring. Indeed it may be said, that all theintellectual productions of modern times, from the seventeenth centuryback to the dark ages, were works of imagination. The bulkiest andmost voluminous writings that proceeded from the cloisters or theuniversities, even the metaphysical disquisitions of the Nominalistsand Realists, and the boundless subtleties of the contending schoolsof the "Divine Doctors, " Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus, fall underthis description. Dull, dreary, unintelligible, and interminable asthey are, they are still in reality works of fancy. They are theoffspring, almost exclusively, of the imaginative faculty. It oughtnot to create surprise, to find that this faculty predominated in theminds and characters of our ancestors, and developed itself to anextent beyond our conception, when we reflect that it was almost theonly one called into exercise, and that it was the leading element ofevery branch of literature and philosophy. 

[Footnote C: The syllogism was originally designed to serve as a_method of determining the arrangement and classification of truthalready shown_; and, when employed for this purpose, was of greatvalue and excellence. It was its perverted application to the_discovery_ of truth which rendered utterly worthless so large a partof the learning and philosophy of the middle ages. The reader willperceive, that it is to the syllogism, as thus misapplied andmisunderstood by the schoolmen, not as designed and used by Aristotle, that the remarks in the text are intended to apply. ]

It is true, that, in the earlier part of the seventeenth century, LordBacon made his sublime discoveries in the department of physicalscience. By disclosing the true method of investigation and reasoningon such subjects, he may be said to have found, or rather to haveinvented, the key that unlocked the hitherto unopened halls of nature. He introduced man to the secret chambers of the universe, and placedin his hand the thread by which he has been conducted to themagnificent results of modern science, and will undoubtedly be led onto results still more magnificent in times to come. But it was not forhuman nature to pass in a moment from darkness to light. Thetransition was slow and gradual: a long twilight intervened before thesun shed its clear and full radiance upon the world. 

The great discoverer himself refused to admit, or was unable todiscern, some of the truths his system had revealed. Bacon wasnumbered among the opponents of the Copernican or true system ofastronomy to the day of his death; so also was Sir Thomas Browne, thegreat philosopher already described, and who flourished during thelatter half of the same century. Indeed, it may be said, that, at thetime of the witchcraft delusion, the ancient empire of darkness whichhad oppressed and crushed the world of science had hardly been shaken. The great and triumphant progress of modern discovery had scarcelybegun. 

I shall now proceed to illustrate these views of the state of sciencein the world at that time by presenting a few instances. Theslightest examination of the accounts which remain of occurrencesdeemed supernatural by our ancestors will satisfy any one that theywere brought about by causes entirely natural, although unknown tothem. For instance, the following circumstances are related by theRev. James Pierpont, pastor of a church in New Haven, in a letter toCotton Mather, and published by him in his "Magnalia:"[D]--

In the year 1646, a new ship, containing a valuable cargo, and havingseveral distinguished persons on board as passengers, put to sea fromNew Haven in the month of January, bound to England. The vessels thatcame over the ensuing spring brought no tidings of her arrival in themother-country. The pious colonists were earnest and instant in theirprayers that intelligence might be received of the missing vessel. Inthe month of June, 1648, "a great thunder-storm arose out of thenorth-west; after which (the hemisphere being serene), about an hourbefore sunset, a ship of like dimensions with the aforesaid, with hercanvas and colors abroad (although the wind was northerly), appearedin the air, coming up from the harbor's mouth, which lies southwardfrom the town, --seemingly with her sails filled under a fresh gale, holding her course north, and continuing under observation, sailingagainst the wind for the space of half an hour. " The phantom-ship wasborne along, until, to the excited imaginations of the spectators, sheseemed to have approached so near that they could throw a stone intoher. Her main-topmast then disappeared, then her mizzen-topmast; thenher masts were entirely carried away; and, finally, her hull fell off, and vanished from sight, --leaving a dull and smoke-colored cloud, which soon dissolved, and the whole atmosphere became clear. Allaffirmed that the airy vision was a precise copy and image of themissing vessel, and that it was sent to announce and describe herfate. They considered it the spectre of the lost ship; and the Rev. Mr. Davenport declared in public, "that God had condescended, for thequieting their afflicted spirits, this extraordinary account of hissovereign disposal of those for whom so many fervent prayers were madecontinually. "

[Footnote D: The manner in which Dr. Mather brings forward this affairshows how loose and inaccurate he was in his description of events. Italso illustrates the tendency of the times to exaggerate, or to paintin the highest colors, whatever was susceptible of being representedas miraculous. There is no reason, however, to doubt that the factstook place substantially as described in the text. The reader isreferred, on this as on all points connected with our early history, to Mr. Savage's instructive, elaborate, and entertaining edition ofWinthrop's "New England. "]

The results of modern science enable us to explain the mysteriousappearance. It is probable that some Dutch vessel, proceeding slowly, quietly, and unconsciously on her voyage from Amsterdam to the NewNetherlands, happened at the time to be passing through the Sound. Atthe moment the apparition was seen in the sky, she was so near, thather reflected image was painted or delineated, to the eyes of theobservers, on the clouds, by laws of optics now generally well known, before her actual outlines could be discerned by them on the horizon. As the sun sunk behind the western hills, and his rays were graduallywithdrawn, the visionary ship slowly disappeared; and the approach ofnight effectually concealed the vessel as she continued her coursealong the Sound. 

The optical illusions that present themselves on the sea-shore, bywhich distant objects are raised to view, the opposite capes andislands made to loom up, lifted above the line of the apparentcircumference of the earth, and thrown into every variety of shapewhich the imagination can conceive, are among the most beautifulphenomena of nature; and they impress the mind with the idea ofenchantment and mystery, more perhaps than any others: but they havereceived a complete solution from modern discovery. 

It should be observed, that the optical principles which explain thesephenomena have recently afforded a foundation for the science, orrather art, of nauscopy; and there are persons in some places, --in theIsle of France, as I have been told, --whose calling and profession isto ascertain and predict the approach of vessels, by their reflectionin the atmosphere and on the clouds, long before they are visible tothe eye, or through the glass. 

The following opinion prevailed at the time of our narrative. Thediscoveries in electricity, itself a recent science, have rendered itimpossible for us to contemplate it without ridicule. But it was thesober opinion of the age. "A great man has noted it, " says a learnedwriter, "that thunders break oftener on churches than any otherhouses, because demons have a peculiar spite at houses that are setapart for the peculiar service of God. "

Every thing that was strange or remarkable--every thing at all out ofthe usual course, every thing that was not clear and plain--wasattributed to supernatural interposition. Indeed, our fathers lived, as they thought, continually in the midst of miracles; and feltthemselves surrounded, at all times, in all scenes, with innumerableinvisible beings. The beautiful verse of Milton describes theirfaith:--

 "Millions of spiritual creatures walk the earth Unseen, both when we wake and when we sleep. "

What was to him, however, a momentary vision of the imagination, wasto them like a perpetual perception of the senses: it was a practicalbelief, an everyday common sentiment, an all-pervading feeling. Butthese supernatural beings very frequently were believed to have becomevisible to our superstitious ancestors. The instances, indeed, werenot rare, of individuals having seen the Devil himself with theirmortal eyes. They may well be brought to notice, as illustrating theideas which then prevailed, and had an immediate, practical effect onthe conduct of men, in reference to the power, presence, and action ofthe Devil in human affairs. This, in fact, is necessary, that we mayunderstand the narrative we are preparing to contemplate oftransactions based wholly on those ideas. 

The following passage is extracted from a letter written to IncreaseMather by the Rev. John Higginson:--

 "The godly Mr. Sharp, who was ruling elder of the church of Salem almost thirty years after, related it of himself, that, being bred up to learning till he was eighteen years old, and then taken off, and put to be an apprentice to a draper in London, he yet notwithstanding continued a strong inclination and eager affection to books, with a curiosity of hearkening after and reading of the strangest and oddest books he could get, spending much of his time that way to the neglect of his business. At one time, there came a man into the shop, and brought a book with him, and said to him, 'Here is a book for you, keep this till I call for it again;' and so went away. Mr. Sharp, after his wonted bookish manner, was eagerly affected to look into that book, and read it, which he did: but, as he read in it, he was seized on by a strange kind of horror, both of body and mind, the hair of his head standing up; and, finding these effects several times, he acquainted his master with it, who, observing the same effects, they concluded it was a conjuring book, and resolved to burn it, which they did. He that brought it in the shape of a man never coming to call for it, they concluded it was the Devil. He, taking this as a solemn warning from God to take heed what books he read, was much taken off from his former bookishness; confining himself to reading the Bible, and other known good books of divinity, which were profitable to his soul. "

Kircher relates the following anecdote, with a full belief of itstruth: He had a friend who was zealously and perseveringly devoted tothe study of alchemy. At one time, while he was intent upon hisoperations, a gentleman entered his laboratory, and kindly offered toassist him. In a few moments, a large mass of the purest gold wasbrought forth from the crucible. The gentleman then took his hat, andwent out: before leaving the apartment, however, he wrote a recipe formaking the precious article. The grateful and admiring mortalcontinued his operations, according to the directions of his visitor;but the charm was lost: he could not succeed, and was at lastcompletely ruined by his costly and fruitless experiments. Both he andhis friend Kircher were fully persuaded that the mysteriousstranger-visitor was the Devil. 

Baxter has recorded a curious interview between Satan and Mr. White, of Dorchester, assessor to the Westminster Assembly:--

"The Devil, in a light night, stood by his bedside. The assessorlooked a while, whether he would say or do any thing, and then said, 'If thou hast nothing to do, I have;' and so turned himself to sleep. "Dr. Hibbert is of opinion, that the Rev. Mr. White treated his satanicmajesty, on this occasion, with "a cool contempt, to which he had notoften been accustomed. "

Indeed, there is nothing more curious or instructive, in the historyof that period, than the light which it sheds upon the influence ofthe belief of the personal existence and operations of the Devil, whenthat belief is carried out fully into its practical effects. TheChristian doctrine had relapsed into a system almost identical withManicheism. Wierus thus describes Satan, as he was regarded in theprevalent theology: "He possesses great courage, incredible cunning, superhuman wisdom, the most acute penetration, consummate prudence, anincomparable skill in veiling the most pernicious artifices under aspecious disguise, and a malicious and infinite hatred towards thehuman race, implacable and incurable. " Milton merely responded to thepopular sentiment in making Satan a character of lofty dignity, and inplacing him on an elevation not "less than archangel ruined. "Hallywell, in his work on witchcraft, declares that "that mighty angelof darkness is not foolishly nor idly to be scoffed at or blasphemed. The Devil, " says he, "may properly be looked upon as a dignity, thoughhis glory be pale and wan, and those once bright and orient colorsfaded and darkened in his robes; and the Scriptures represent him as aprince, though it be of devils. " Although our fathers cannot becharged with having regarded the Devil in this respectful anddeferential light, it must be acknowledged that they gave him aconspicuous and distinguished--we might almost say a dignified--agencyin the affairs of life and the government of the world: they wereprone to confess, if not to revere, his presence, in all scenes and atall times. He occupied a wide space, not merely in their theology andphilosophy, but in their daily and familiar thoughts. [E]

[Footnote E: It is much to be regretted, that Farmer, after havingwritten with such admirable success upon the temptation, thedemoniacs, miracles, and the worship of human spirits, did not live toaccomplish his original design, by giving the world a completediscussion and elucidation of the Scripture doctrine of the Devil. ]

Cotton Mather, in one of his sermons, carries home this peculiarbelief to the consciences of his hearers, in a manner that could nothave failed to quicken and startle the most dull and drowsy amongthem. 

 "No place, " says he, "that I know of, has got such a spell upon it as will always keep the Devil out. The meeting-house, wherein we assemble for the worship of God, is filled with many holy people and many holy concerns continually; but, if our eyes were so refined as the servant of the prophet had his of old, I suppose we should now see a throng of devils in this very place. The apostle has intimated that angels come in among us: there are angels, it seems, that hark how I preach, and how you hear, at this hour. And our own sad experience is enough to intimate that the devils are likewise rendezvousing here. It is reported in Job i. 5, 'When the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, Satan came also among them. ' When we are in our church assemblies, oh, how many devils, do you imagine, crowd in among us! There is a devil that rocks one to sleep. There is a devil that makes another to be thinking of, he scarcely knows what himself. And there is a devil that makes another to be pleasing himself with wanton and wicked speculations. It is also possible, that we have our closets or our studies gloriously perfumed with devotions every day; but, alas! can we shut the Devil out of them? No: let us go where we will, we shall still find a devil nigh unto us. Only when we come to heaven, we shall be out of his reach for ever. "

It is very remarkable, that such a train of thought as this did notsuggest to the mind of Dr. Mather the true doctrine of the Biblerespecting the Devil. One would have supposed, that, in carrying outthe mode of speaking of him as a person to this extent, it would haveoccurred to him, that it might be that the scriptural expressions of asimilar kind were also mere personifications of moral and abstractideas. In describing the inattention, irreverence, and unholyreflections of his hearers as the operations of the Devil, it iswonderful that his eyes were not opened to discern the import of ourSaviour's interpretation of the Parable of the Tares, in which hedeclares, that he understands by the Devil whatever obstructs thegrowth of virtue and piety in the soul, the causes that efface goodimpressions and give a wrong inclination to the thoughts andaffections, such as "the cares of this world" or "the deceitfulness ofriches. " By these are the tares planted, and by these is their growthpromoted. "The enemy that sowed them is the Devil. "

Satan was regarded as the foe and opposer of all improvement inknowledge and civilization. The same writer thus quaintly expressesthis opinion: He "has hindered mankind, for many ages, from hittingthose useful inventions which yet were so obvious and facile that itis everybody's wonder that they were not sooner hit upon. The bemistedworld must jog on for thousands of years without the knowledge of theloadstone, till a Neapolitan stumbled upon it about three hundredyears ago. Nor must the world be blessed with such a matchless engineof learning and virtue as that of printing, till about the middle ofthe fifteenth century. Nor could one old man, all over the face of thewhole earth, have the benefit of such a little, though most needful, thing as a pair of spectacles, till a Dutchman, a little while ago, accommodated us. Indeed, as the Devil does begrudge us all manner ofgood, so he does annoy us with all manner of woe. " In one of hissermons, Cotton Mather claimed for himself and his clerical brethrenthe honor of being particularly obnoxious to the malice of the EvilOne. "The ministers of God, " says he, "are more dogged by the Devilthan other persons are. "

Without a knowledge of this sentiment, the witchcraft delusion of ourfathers cannot be understood. They were under an impression, that theDevil, having failed to prevent the progress of knowledge in Europe, had abandoned his efforts to obstruct it effectually there; hadwithdrawn into the American wilderness, intending here to make a finalstand; and had resolved to retain an undiminished empire over thewhole continent and his pagan allies, the native inhabitants. Ourfathers accounted for the extraordinary descent and incursions of theEvil One among them, in 1692, on the supposition that it was adesperate effort to prevent them from bringing civilization andChristianity within his favorite retreat; and their souls were firedwith the glorious thought, that, by carrying on the war with vigoragainst him and his confederates, the witches, they would becomechosen and honored instruments in the hand of God for breaking downand abolishing the last stronghold on the earth of the kingdom ofdarkness. 

That this opinion was not merely a conceit of their vanity, or anoverweening estimate of their local importance, but a calm, deliberateconviction entertained by others as well as themselves, can be shownby abundant evidence from the literature of that period. I will quotea single illustration of the form in which this thought occupied theirminds. The subject is worthy of being thoroughly appreciated, as itaffords the key that opens to view the motives and sentiments whichgave the mighty impetus to the witchcraft prosecution here in NewEngland. 

Joseph Mede, B. D. , Fellow of Christ's College, in Cambridge, England, died in 1638, at the age of fifty-three years. He was perhaps, allthings considered, the most profound scholar of his times. Hiswritings give evidence of a brilliant genius and an enlightenedspirit. They were held in the highest esteem by his contemporaries ofall denominations, and in all parts of Europe. He was a Churchman; buthad, to a remarkable degree, the confidence of nonconformists. Heentertained, as will appear by what follows, in the boldest form, thethen prevalent opinions concerning diabolical agency and influence;but, at the same time, was singularly free from some of the worsttraits of superstition and bigotry. His intimacy with the learned Dr. William Ames, and the general tone and tendency of his writings, naturally made him an authority with Protestants, particularly thePilgrims and Puritans of New England. His posthumous writings, published in 1652, are exceedingly interesting. They contain fragmentsfound among his papers, brief discussions of points of criticism, philosophy, and theology, and a varied correspondence on such subjectswith eminent men of his day. Among his principal correspondents wasDr. William Twiss, himself a person of much ingenious learning, andwhom John Norton, as we are told by Cotton Mather, "loved and admired"above all men of that age. The following passages between themillustrate the point before us. 

In a letter dated March 2, 1634, Twiss writes thus:--

 "Now, I beseech you, let me know what your opinion is of our English plantations in the New World. Heretofore, I have wondered in my thoughts at the providence of God concerning that world; not discovered till this Old World of ours is almost at an end; and then no footsteps found of the knowledge of the true God, much less of Christ; and then considering our English plantations of late, and the opinion of many grave divines concerning the gospel's fleeting westward. Sometimes I have had such thoughts, Why may not _that_ be the place of the _New Jerusalem_? But you have handsomely and fully cleared me from such odd conceits. But what, I pray? Shall our English there degenerate, and join themselves with Gog and Magog? We have heard lately divers ways, that our people there have no hope of the conversion of the natives. And, the very week after I received your last letter, I saw a letter, written from New England, discoursing of an impossibility of subsisting there; and seems to prefer the confession of God's truth in any condition here in Old England, rather than run over to enjoy their liberty there; yea, and that the gospel is like to be more dear in New England than in Old. And, lastly, unless they be exceeding careful, and God wonderfully merciful, they are like to lose that life and zeal for God and his truth in New England which they enjoyed in Old; as whereof they have already woful experience, and many there feel it to their smart. "

Mr. Mede's answer was as follows:--

 "Concerning our plantations in the American world, I wish them as well as anybody; though I differ from them far, both in other things, and on the grounds they go upon. And though there be but little hope of the general conversion of those natives or any considerable part of that continent, yet I suppose it may be a work pleasing to Almighty God and our blessed Saviour to affront the Devil with the sound of the gospel and the cross of Christ, in those places where he had thought to have reigned securely, and out of the din thereof; and, though we make no Christians there, yet to bring some thither to disturb and vex him, where he reigned without check. 

 "For that I may reveal my conceit further, though perhaps I cannot prove it, yet I think thus, --that those countries were first inhabited since our Saviour and his apostles' times, and not before; yea, perhaps, some ages after, there being no signs or footsteps found among them, or any monuments of older habitation, as there is with us. 

 "That the Devil, being impatient of the sound of the gospel and cross of Christ, in every part of this Old World, so that he could in no place be quiet for it; and foreseeing that he was like to lose all here; so he thought to provide himself of a seed over which he might reign securely, and in a place _ubi nec Pelopidarum facta neque nomen audiret_. That, accordingly, he drew a colony out of some of those barbarous nations dwelling upon the Northern Ocean (whither the sound of Christ had not yet come), and promising them by some oracle to show them a country far better than their own (which he might soon do), pleasant and large, where never man yet inhabited; he conducted them over those desert lands and islands (of which there are many in that sea) by the way of the north into America, which none would ever have gone, had they not first been assured there was a passage that way into a more desirable country. Namely, as when the world apostatized from the worship of the true God, God called Abraham out of Chaldee into the land of Canaan, of him to raise a seed to preserve a light unto his name: so the Devil, when he saw the world apostatizing from him, laid the foundations of a new kingdom, by deducting this colony from the north into America, where they have increased since into an innumerable multitude. And where did the Devil ever reign more absolutely, and without control, since mankind first fell under his clutches?

 "And here it is to be noted, that the story of the Mexican kingdom (which was not founded above four hundred years before ours came thither) relates, out of their own memorials and traditions, that they came to that place from the _north_, whence their god, _Vitziliputzli_, led them, going in an ark before them: and, after divers years' travel and many stations (like enough after some generations), they came to the place which the sign he had given them at their first setting-forth pointed out; where they were to finish their travels, build themselves a _city_, and their god a _temple_, which is the place where Mexico was built. Now, if the Devil were God's ape in _this_, why might he not be likewise in bringing the first colony of men into that world out of ours? namely, by oracle, as God did Abraham out of Chaldee, whereto I before resembled it. 

 "But see the hand of Divine Providence. When the offspring of these _runagates_ from the sound of Christ's gospel had now replenished that other world, and began to flourish in those two kingdoms of Peru and Mexico, Christ our Lord sends his mastives, the Spaniards, to hunt them out, and worry them; which they did in so hideous a manner, as the like thereunto scarce ever was done since the sons of Noah came out of the ark. What an affront to the Devil was this, where he had thought to have reigned securely, and been for ever concealed from the knowledge of the followers of Christ!

 "Yet the Devil perhaps is _less grieved_ for the loss of his servants by the _destroying_ of them, than he would be to lose them by the _saving_ of them; by which latter way, I doubt the Spaniards have despoiled him but of a few. What, then, if Christ our Lord will give him his _second affront_ with better Christians, which may be more grievous to him than the former? And, if Christ shall set him up a light in this manner to dazzle and torment the Devil at his own home, I hope they (viz. , the Americans) shall not so far degenerate (not all of them) as to come into that army of Gog and Magog against the kingdom of Christ, but be translated thither before the Devil be loosed; if not, presently after his tying up. "

Dr. Twiss, in a reply to the above, dated April 6, 1635, thanks Medefor his letter, which he says he read "with recreation and delight;"and, particularly in reference to the "peopling of the New World, " heaffirms that there is "more in this letter of yours than formerly Ihave been acquainted with. Your conceit thereabouts, if I have anyjudgment, is grave and ponderous. "

This correspondence, while it serves as a specimen of the style ofMede, is a remarkable instance of the power of a sagacious intellectto penetrate through the darkness of theoretical and fanciful errors, and behold the truth that lies behind and beyond. The wholesuperstructure of the Devil, his oracles, and his schemes of policyand dominion, covers, in this brief familiar epistle, what is, Isuppose, the theory most accredited at this day of the origin andtraduction of the aboriginal races of America, proceeding from thenearest portions of the ancient continent on the North, and advancingdown over the vast spaces towards Central and South America. Theletter also foreshadows the decisive conflict which is here to bewaged between the elements of freedom and slavery, between social andpolitical systems that will rescue and exalt humanity, and those whichdepress and degrade it. In the phraseology of that age, it was to bedetermined whether--the Old World, in the language of Twiss, "beingalmost at an end"--a "light" should be "set up" here to usher in the"kingdom of Christ, " or America also be for ever given over to the"army of Gog and Magog. "

Our fathers were justified in feeling that this was the sense of theirresponsibility entertained by all learned men and true Christians inthe Old World; and they were ready to meet and discharge it faithfullyand manfully. They were told, and they believed, that it had fallen totheir lot to be the champions of the cross of Christ against the powerof the Devil. They felt, as I have said, that they were fighting himin his last stronghold, and they were determined to "tie him up" forever. 

This is the true and just explanation of their general policy ofadministration, in other matters, as well as in the witchcraftprosecutions. 

The conclusion to which we are brought, by a review of the seventeenthcentury up to the period when the prosecutions took place here, is, that the witchcraft delusion pervaded the whole civilized world andevery profession and department of society. It received the sanctionof all the learned and distinguished English judges who flourishedwithin the century, from Sir Edward Coke to Sir Matthew Hale. It wascountenanced by the greatest philosophers and physicians, and wasembraced by men of the highest genius and accomplishments, even byLord Bacon himself. It was established by the convocation of bishops, and preached by the clergy. Dr. Henry More, of Christ's College, Cambridge, in addition to his admirable poetical and philosophicalworks, wrote volumes to defend it. It was considered as worthy of thestudy of the most cultivated and liberal minds to discover anddistinguish "a true witch by proper trials and symptoms. " Theexcellent Dr. Calamy has already been mentioned in this connection;and Richard Baxter wrote his work entitled "The Certainty of the Worldof Spirits, " for the special purpose of confirming and diffusing thebelief. He kept up a correspondence with Cotton Mather, and with hisfather, Increase Mather, through the medium of which he stimulated andencouraged them in their proceedings against supposed witches inBoston and elsewhere. The divines of that day seem to have persuadedthemselves into the belief that the doctrines of demonology wereessential to the gospel, and that the rejection of them was equivalentto infidelity. A writer in one of our modern journals, in speaking ofthe prosecutions for witchcraft, happily and justly observes, "It wastruly hazardous to oppose those judicial murders. If any one venturedto do so, the Catholics burned him as a heretic, and the Protestantshad a vehement longing to hang him for an atheist. " The writings ofDr. More, of Baxter, Glanvil, Perkins, and others, had beencirculating for a long time in New England before the trials began atSalem. It was such a review of the history of opinion as we have nowmade, which led Dr. Bentley to declare that "the agency of invisiblebeings, if not a part of every religion, is not contrary to any one. It may be found in all ages, and in the most remote countries. It isthen no just subject for our admiration, that a belief so alarming toour fears, so natural to our prejudices, and so easily abused bysuperstition, should obtain among our fathers, when it had not beenrejected in the ages of philosophy, letters, and even revelation. "

The works on demonology, the legal proceedings in prosecutions, andthe phraseology of the people, gave more or less definite form tocertain prominent points which may be summarily noticed. Several termsand expressions were employed to characterize persons supposed to beconversant with supernatural and magic art; such as diviner, enchanter, charmer, conjurer, necromancer, fortune-teller, soothsayer, augur, and sorcerer. These words are sometimes used as more or lesssynonymous, although, strictly speaking, they have meanings quitedistinct. But none of them convey the idea attached to the name ofwitch. It was sometimes especially used to signify a female, whilewizard was exclusively applied to a male. The distinction was not, however, often attempted to be made; the former title beingprevailingly applied to either sex. A witch was regarded as a personwho had made an actual, deliberate, formal compact with Satan, bywhich it was agreed that she should become his faithful subject, anddo all in her power to aid him in his rebellion against God and hiswarfare against the gospel and church of Christ; and, in considerationof such allegiance and service, Satan, on his part, agreed to exercisehis supernatural powers in her favor, and communicate to her thosepowers, in a greater or less degree, as she proved herself anefficient and devoted supporter of his cause. Thus, a witch wasconsidered as a person who had transferred allegiance and worship fromGod to the Devil. 

The existence of this compact was supposed to confer great additionalpower on the Devil, as well as on his new subject; for the doctrineseems to have prevailed, that, for him to act with effect upon men, the intervention, instrumentality, and co-operation of human beingswas necessary; and almost unlimited potency was ascribed to thecombined exertions of Satan and those persons in league with him. Awitch was believed to have the power, through her compact with theDevil, of afflicting, distressing, and rending whomsoever she would. She could cause them to pine away, throw them into the most frightfulconvulsions, choke, bruise, pierce, and craze them, subjecting them toevery description of pain, disease, and torture, and even to deathitself. She was believed to possess the faculty of being present, inher shape or apparition, at a different place, at any distancewhatever, from that which her actual body occupied. Indeed, anindefinite amount of supernatural ability, and a boundless freedom andvariety of methods for its exercise, were supposed to result from thediabolical compact. Those upon whom she thus exercised her malignantand mysterious energies were said to be bewitched. 

Beside these infernal powers, the alliance with Satan was believed toconfer knowledge such as no other mortal possessed. The witch couldperform the same wonders, in giving information of the things thatbelong to the invisible world, which is alleged in our day, byspirit-rappers, to be received through mediums. She could read inmostthoughts, suggest ideas to the minds of the absent, throw temptationsin the path of those whom she desired to delude and destroy, bring upthe spirits of the departed, and hear from them the secrets of theirlives and of their deaths, and their experiences in the scenes ofbeing on which they entered at their departure from this. 

When we consider that these opinions were not merely prevalent amongthe common people, but sanctioned by learning and philosophy, scienceand jurisprudence; that they possessed an authority, which but fewventured to question and had been firmly established by theconvictions of centuries, --none can be surprised at the alarm itcreated, when the belief became current, that there were those in thecommunity, and even in the churches, who had actually entered intothis dark confederacy against God and heaven, religion and virtue; andthat individuals were beginning to suffer from their diabolical power. It cannot be considered strange, that men looked with more than commonhorror upon persons against whom what was regarded as overwhelmingevidence was borne of having engaged in this conspiracy with all thatwas evil, and this treason against all that was good. 

Elaborate works, scientific, philosophical, and judicial in theirpretensions and reputation, --to some of which reference has beenmade, --defined and particularized the various forms of evidence bywhich the crime of confederacy with Satan could be proved. 

It was believed that the Devil affixed his mark to the bodies of thosein alliance with him, and that the point where this mark was madebecame callous and dead. The law provided, specifically, the means ofdetecting and identifying this sign. It required that the prisonershould be subjected to the scrutiny of a jury of the same sex, whowould make a minute inspection of the body, shaving the head andhandling every part. They would pierce it with pins; and if, as mighthave been expected, particularly in aged persons, any spot could befound insensible to the torture, or any excrescence, induration, orfixed discoloration, it was looked upon as visible evidence anddemonstration of guilt. A physician or "chirurgeon" was required to bepresent at these examinations. In conducting them, there was liabilityto great roughness and unfeeling recklessness of treatment; and thewhole procedure was barbarous and shocking to every just and delicatesensibility. There is reason to believe, that, in the trials here, there was more considerateness, humanity, and regard to a sense ofdecent propriety, than in similar proceedings in other countries, sofar as this branch of the investigation is regarded. 

Another accredited field of evidence, recognized in the books and inlegal proceedings, was as follows: It was believed, that, when witchesfound it inconvenient from any cause to execute their infernal designsupon those whom they wished to afflict by going to them in theirnatural human persons, they transformed themselves into the likenessof some animal, --a dog, hog, cat, rat, mouse, or toad;birds--particularly yellow birds--were often imagined to perform thisservice, as representing witches or the Devil. They also had impsunder their control. These imps were generally supposed to bear theresemblance of some small insect, --such as a fly or a spider. Thelatter animal was prevailingly considered as most likely to act inthis character. The accused person was closely watched, in order thatthe spider imp might be seen when it approached to obtain itsnourishment, as it was thought to do, from the witchmark on the bodyof the culprit. Within the cells of a prison, spiders were, of course, often seen. Whenever one made its appearance, the guard attacked itwith all the zeal and vehemence with which it was natural and properto assault an agent of the Wicked One. If the spider was killed in theencounter, it was considered as an innocent animal, and all suspicionwas removed from its character as the diabolical confederate of theprisoner; but if it escaped into a crack or crevice of the apartment, as spiders often do when assailed, all doubt of its guilty connectionwith the person accused of witchcraft was removed: it was set down as, beyond question or cavil, her veritable imp; and the evidence of herconfederacy with Satan was thenceforward regarded as complete. Thebooks of law and other learned writings, as well as the practice ofcourts in the old countries, recognized this doctrine oftransformation into the shapes of animals, and the employment of imps. Where judicial tribunals countenanced the popular credulity inmaintaining these ideas, there was no security for innocence, and noescape from wrong. No matter how clear and certain the evidenceadduced, that an accused individual, at the time alleged, was absentfrom the specified place; no matter how far distant, whether twenty ora thousand miles, it availed him nothing; for it was charged that hewas present, and acted through his agent or imp. This notion wasfurther enlarged by the establishment of the additional doctrine, thata witch could be present, and act with demoniac power upon hervictims, anywhere, at all times, and at any distance, without theinstrumental agency of any other animal or being, in her spirit, spectre, or apparition. When the person on trial was accused of havingtortured or strangled or pinched or bruised another, it did not breakthe force of the accusation to bring hundreds of witnesses to provethat he was, at the very time, in another remote place or country; forit was alleged that he was present in the spectral shape in whichSatan enabled his spirit to be and to act any and every where at once. It was impossible to disprove the charge, and the last defence ofinnocence was swept away. 

If any thing strange or remarkable could be discovered in the persons, histories, or deportment of accused persons, the usage of thetribunals, and the books of authority on the subject, allowed it to bebrought in evidence against them. If any thing they had forewarned, or even conjectured, happened to come to pass, any careless speech hadbeen verified by events, any extraordinary knowledge had beenmanifested, or any marvellous feats of strength or agility beendisplayed, they were brought up with decisive and fatal effect. 

A witch was believed to have the power of operating upon her victims, at any distance, by the instrumentality of puppets. She would procureor make an object like a doll, or a figure of some animal, --any littlebunch of cloth or bundle of rags would answer the purpose. She wouldwill the puppet to represent the person whom she proposed to tormentor afflict; and then whatever she did to the puppet would be sufferedby the party it represented at any distance, however remote. A pinstuck into the puppet would pierce the flesh of the person whom shewished to afflict, and produce the appropriate sensations of pain. Sowould a pinch, or a blow, or any kind of violence. When any one wasarrested on the charge of witchcraft, a search was immediately madefor puppets from garret to cellar; and if any thing could be foundthat might possibly be imagined to possess that character, --anyremnant of flannel or linen wrapped up, the foot of an old stocking, or a cushion of any kind, particularly if there were any pins init, --it was considered as weighty and quite decisive evidence againstthe accused party. 

A writer, in a recent number of the "North-American Review, " on thesuperstitions of the American Indians, makes the followingstatement:--

 "The sorcerer, by charms, magic songs, magic feats, and the beating of his drum, had power over the spirits, and those occult influences inherent in animals and inanimate things. He could call to him the souls of his enemies. They appeared before him in the form of stones. He chopped and bruised them with his hatchet; blood and flesh issued forth; and the intended victim, however distant, languished and died. Like the sorcerer of the middle ages, he made images of those he wished to destroy, and, muttering incantations, punctured them with an awl; whereupon the persons represented sickened and pined away. "

It was a received opinion, accredited and acted upon in courts, that aperson in confederacy with the Evil One could not weep. Those accusedof this crime, both in Europe and America, were, in many instances, ofan age and condition which rendered it impossible for them, howeverinnocent, to escape the effect of this test. A decrepit, emaciatedperson, shrivelled and desiccated by age, was placed at the bar: andif she could not weep on the spot; if, in consequence of her witheredframe, her amazement and indignation at the false and malignantcharges by which she was circumvented, her exhausted sensibility, hersullen despair, the hopeless horror of her situation, or, from whatoften was found to be the effect of the treatment such personsreceived, a high-toned consciousness of innocence, and a bravedefiance and stern condemnation of her maligners and persecutors; if, from any cause, the fountain of tears was closed or dried up, --theirfailure to come forth at the bidding of her defamers was regarded as asure and irrefragable proof of her guilt. 

King James explains the circumstance, that witches could not weep, inrather a curious manner:--

 "For as, in a secret murther, if the dead carkasse bee at any time thereafter handled by the murtherer it will gush out of bloud, as if the bloud were crying to the heaven for revenge of the murtherer, God having appointed that secret supernaturall signe for triall of that secret unnaturall crime; so it appeares that God hath appointed (for a supernaturall signe of the monstrous impietie of witches), that the water shall refuse to receive them in her bosome that have shaken off them the sacred water of baptisme, and wilfully refused the benefite thereof: no, not so much as their eyes are able to shed teares (threaten and torture them as ye please), while first they repent (God not permitting them to dissemble their obstinacie in so horrible a crime), albeit the woman kind especially be able otherwise to shed teares at every light occasion when they will, --yea, although it were dissemblingly like the crocodiles. "

Reginald Scott, in introducing a Romish form of adjuration, makes thefollowing excellent remarks on the trial by tears:--

 "But alas that teares should be thought sufficient to excuse or condemn in so great a cause, and so weightie a triall! I am sure that the worst sort of the children of Israel wept bitterlie; yea, if there were any witches at all in Israel, they wept. For it is written, that all the children of Israel wept. Finallie, if there be any witches in hell, I am sure they weepe; for there is weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. But God knoweth many an honest matron cannot sometimes in the heaviness of her heart shed teares; the which oftentimes are more readie and common with crafty queans and strumpets than with sober women. For we read of two kinds of teares in a woman's eie; the one of true greefe, and the other of deceipt. And it is written, that 'Dediscere flere foeminam est mendacium;' which argueth that they lie, which saie that wicked women cannot weepe. But let these tormentors take heed, that the teares in this case which runne down the widowe's cheeks, with their crie, spoken of by Jesus Sirach, be not heard above. But, lo, what learned, godlie and lawful meanes these Popish Inquisitors have invented for the triall of true or false teares:--

 'I conjure thee, by the amorous tears which Jesus Christ, our Saviour, shed upon the crosse for the salvation of the world; and by the most earnest and burning teares of his mother, the most glorious Virgine Marie, sprinkled upon his wounds late in the evening; and by all the teares which everie saint and elect vessell of God hath poured out heere in the world, and from whose eies he hath wiped awaie all teares, --that, if thou be without fault, thou maist poure downe teares aboundantlie; and, if thou be guiltie, that thou weep in no wise. In the name of the Father, of the Sonne, and of the Holie Ghost. Amen. '

 "The more you conjure, the lesse she weepeth. "

A distinction was made between black and white witches. The formerwere those who had leagued with Satan for the purpose of doing injuryto others, while the latter class was composed of such persons as hadresorted to the arts and charms of divination and sorcery in order toprotect themselves and others from diabolical influence. They wereboth considered as highly, if not equally, criminal. Fuller, in his"Profane State, " thus speaks of them: "Better is it to lap one'spottage like a dog, than to eat it mannerly, with a spoon of theDevil's giving. Black witches hurt and do mischief; but, in deeds ofdarkness, there is no difference of colors. The white and the blackare both guilty alike in compounding with the Devil. " White witchespretended to extract their power from the mysterious virtues ofcertain plants. The following form of charmed words was used inplucking them:--

 "Hail to thee, holy herb, Growing in the ground; On the Mount of Calvarie, First wert thou found; Thou art good for many a grief, And healest many a wound: In the name of sweet Jesu, I lift thee from the ground. "

Then there was the evidence of ocular fascination. The accused and theaccusers were brought into the presence of the examining magistrate, and the supposed witch was ordered to look upon the afflicted persons;instantly upon coming within the glance of her eye, they would screamout, and fall down as in a fit. It was thought that an invisible andimpalpable fluid darted from the eye of the witch, and penetrated thebrain of the bewitched. By bringing the witch so near that she couldtouch the afflicted persons with her hand, the malignant fluid wasattracted back into her hand, and the sufferers recovered theirsenses. It is singular to notice the curious resemblance between thisopinion--the joint product of superstition and imposture--and theresults to which modern science has led us in the discoveries ofgalvanism and animal electricity. The doctrine of fascinationmaintained its hold upon the public credulity for a long time, andgave occasion to the phrase, still in familiar use among us, of"looking upon a person with an evil eye. " Its advocates claimed, inits defence, the authority of the Cartesian philosophy; but it cannotbe considered, in an age of science and reason, as having any bettersupport than the rural superstition of Virgil's simple shepherd, whothus complains of the condition of his emaciated flock:--

 "They look so thin, Their bones are barely covered with their skin. What magic has bewitched the woolly dams? And what ill eyes beheld the tender lambs?"

Witchcraft, in all ages and countries, was recognized as a reality, just as much as any of the facts of nature, or incidents to whichmankind is liable. By the laws of all nations, Catholic and Protestantalike, in the old country and in the new, it was treated as a capitaloffence, and classed with murder and other highest crimes, althoughregarded as of a deeper dye and blacker character than them all. Indictments and trials of persons accused of it were not, therefore, considered as of any special interest, or as differing in anyessential particulars from proceedings against any other descriptionof offenders. There had been many such proceedings in the Americancolonies, --more, perhaps, than have come to our knowledge, --previousto 1692. They were not looked upon as sufficiently extraordinary to betransferred, from the oblivion sweeping like a perpetual deluge overthe vast multitude of human experiences, to the ark of history, whichrescues only a select few. The following are the principal facts ofthis class of which we have information:--

William Penn presided, in his judicial character, at the trial of twoSwedish women for witchcraft; the grand jury, acting underinstructions from him, having found bills against them. They weresaved, not in consequence of any peculiar reluctance to proceedagainst them arising out of the nature of the alleged crime, but onlyfrom some technical defect in the indictment. If it had not been forthis accidental circumstance, as the annalist of Philadelphiasuggests, scenes similar to those subsequently occurring in SalemVillage might have darkened the history of the Quakers, Swedes, Germans, and Dutch, who dwelt in the City of Brotherly Love and theadjacent colonies. There had been trials and executions for witchcraftin other parts of New England, and excitements had obtained more orless currency in reference to the assaults of the powers of darknessupon human affairs. These incidents prepared the way for the delusionin Salem, and provided elements to form its character. They must not, therefore, be wholly overlooked. But the memorials for theirelucidation are very defective. Hutchinson's "History ofMassachusetts" is, perhaps, the most valuable authority on thesubject. He enjoyed an advantage over any other writer, before, since, or hereafter, so far as relates to the witchcraft proceedings in 1692;for he had access to all the records and documents connected with it, a great part of which have subsequently been lost or destroyed. Histreatment of that particular topic is more satisfactory than canelsewhere be found. But of incidents of the sort that preceded it, hisinformation appears to have been very slight and unreliable. It is asingular fact, that we know more of the history of the first centuryof New England than was known by the most enlightened persons of theintermediate century. There was no regular organized newspaper press, the commemorative age had not begun, and none seem to have been fullyaware of the importance of putting events on record. The publication, but a few years since, of the colonial journals of the firsthalf-century of Massachusetts; researches by innumerable hands amongpapers on file in public offices; the printing of town-histories, andthe collections made by historical and genealogical societies, --haverescued from oblivion, and redeemed from error, many points of thegreatest interest and importance. 

Winthrop, in his "Journal, " gives an account of the execution ofMargaret Jones, of Charlestown, who had been tried and condemned bythe Court of Assistants. The charges against her were, that she had amalignant touch, so that many persons, --"men, women, andchildren, "--on coming in contact with her, were "taken with deafness, vomiting, or other violent pains or sickness;" that she practisedphysic, and her medicines, "being such things as (by her ownconfession) were harmless, as aniseed, liquors, &c. , yet hadextraordinary violent effects;" and that they found on her body, "upona forced search, " the witchmarks, particularly "a teat, as fresh if ithad been newly sucked. " Other ridiculous allegations were made againsther. As for the effects of the touch, it is obvious that they could beeasily simulated by evil-disposed persons. The whole substance of heroffence seems to have been, that she was very successful in the use ofsimple prescriptions for the cure of diseases. Her practice wascharged as "against the ordinary course, and beyond the apprehensionof all physicians and surgeons. " A bitter animosity was, accordingly, raised against her. She treated her accusers and defamers withindignant resentment. "Her behavior at her trial, " says Winthrop, "wasvery intemperate, lying notoriously, and railing upon the jury andwitnesses, &c. ; and, in the like distemper, she died. " We shall findthat the bold assertion of innocence, and indignant denunciations ofthe persecutors and defamers who had destroyed their reputations andpursued them to the death, by persons tried and executed forwitchcraft, in 1692, were regarded by some, as they were by Winthrop, as proofs of ill-temper and falsehood. The Governor closes hisstatement about Margaret Jones, by relating what he regarded as ademonstration of her guilt: "The same day and hour she was executed, there was a very great tempest at Connecticut, which blew down manytrees, &c. " The records of the General Court contain no express noticeof this case. Perhaps it is referred to in the following paragraph, under date of May 13, 1648:--

 "This Court, being desirous that the same course which hath been taken in England for the discovery of witches, by watching, may also be taken here, with the witch now in question, and therefore do order that a strict watch be set about her every night, and that her husband be confined to a private room, and watched also. "

Margaret Jones was executed in Boston on the 15th of June. Hutchinsonrefers to the statement made by Johnson, in the "Wonder-workingProvidence, " that "more than one or two in Springfield, in 1645, weresuspected of witchcraft; that much diligence was used, both for thefinding them and for the Lord's assisting them against their witchery;yet have they, as is supposed, bewitched not a few persons, among whomtwo of the reverend elder's children. " Johnson's loose andimmethodical narrative covers the period from 1645 till toward the endof 1651; and Hutchinson was probably misled in supposing that theSpringfield cases occurred as early as 1645. The Massachusettscolonial records, under the date of May 8, 1651, have this entry:--

 "The Court, understanding that Mary Parsons, now in prison, accused for a witch, is likely, through weakness, to die before trial, if it be deferred, do order, that, on the morrow, by eight o'clock in the morning, she be brought before and tried by the General Court, the rather that Mr. Pinchon may be present to give his testimony in the case. "

Mr. Pinchon was probably able to stay a few days longer. She was notbrought to trial before the Court until the 13th, under which date isthe following:--

 "Mary Parsons, wife of Hugh Parsons, of Springfield, being committed to prison for suspicion of witchcraft, as also for murdering her own child, was this day called forth, and indicted for witchcraft. 'By the name of Mary Parsons, you are here, before the General Court, charged, in the name of this Commonwealth, that, not having the fear of God before your eyes nor in your heart, being seduced by the Devil, and yielding to his malicious motion, about the end of February last, at Springfield, to have familiarity, or consulted with, a familiar spirit, making a covenant with him; and have used divers devilish practices by witchcraft, to the hurt of the persons of Martha and Rebecca Moxon, against the word of God and the laws of this jurisdiction, long since made and published. ' To which indictment she pleaded 'Not guilty. ' All evidences brought in against her being heard and examined, the Court found the evidences were not sufficient to prove her a witch, and therefore she was cleared in that respect. 

 "At the same time, she was indicted for murdering her child. 'By the name of Mary Parsons, you are here, before the General Court, charged, in the name of this Commonwealth, that, not having the fear of God before your eyes nor in your heart, being seduced by the Devil, and yielding to his instigations and the wickedness of your own heart, about the beginning of March last, in Springfield, in or near your own house, did wilfully and most wickedly murder your own child, against the word of God and the laws of this jurisdiction, long since made and published. ' To which she acknowledged herself guilty. 

 "The Court, finding her guilty of murder by her own confession, &c. , proceeded to judgment: 'You shall be carried from this place to the place from whence you came, and from thence to the place of execution, and there hang till you be dead. '"

Under the same date--May 13--is an order of the Court appointing a dayof humiliation "throughout our jurisdiction in all the churches, " inconsideration, among other things, of the extent to which "Satanprevails amongst us in respect of witchcrafts. "

The colonial records, under date of May 31, 1652, recite the facts, that Hugh Parsons, of Springfield, had been tried before the Court ofAssistants--held at Boston, May 12, 1652--for witchcraft; that thecase was transferred to a "jury of trials, " which found him guilty. The magistrates not consenting to the verdict of the jury, the casecame legally to the General Court, which body decided that "he was notlegally guilty of witchcraft, and so not to die by law. "

When these citations are collated and examined, and it is rememberedthat Mr. Moxon was the "reverend elder" of the church at Springfield, it cannot be doubted that the case of the Parsonses is that referredto by Johnson in the "Wonder-working Providence, " and that Hutchinsonwas in error as to the date. We are left in doubt as to the fate ofMary Parsons. There is a marginal entry on the records, to the effectthat she was reprieved to the 29th of May. Neither Johnson norHutchinson seem to have thought that the sentence was ever carriedinto effect. It clearly never ought to have been. The woman was in aweak and dying condition, her mind was probably broken down, --thevictim of that peculiar kind of mania--partaking of the character of areligious fanaticism and perversion of ideas--that has often led tochild-murder. 

These instances show, that, at that time, the General Court exercisedconsideration and discrimination in the treatment of questions of thiskind brought before it. 

Hutchinson, on the authority of Hale, says that a woman at Dorchester, and another at Cambridge, were executed, not far from this time, forwitchcraft; and that they asserted their innocence with their dyingbreath. He also says, that, in 1650, "a poor wretch, --MaryOliver, --probably weary of her life from the general reputation ofbeing a witch, after long examination, was brought to a confession ofher guilt; but I do not find that she was executed. "

In 1656, a very remarkable case occurred. William Hibbins was amerchant in Boston, and one of the most prominent and honored citizensof Massachusetts. He was admitted a freeman in 1640; was deputy inthe General Court in that and the following year; was elected anassistant for twelve successive years, --from 1643 to 1654; representedthe Colony, for a time, as its agent in England, and received thethanks of the General Court for his valuable service there. No oneappears to have had more influence, or to have enjoyed more honorabledistinction, during his long legislative career. He died in 1654. Hutchinson says, in the text of his first and second volumes, that hiswidow was tried, condemned, and hanged as a witch in 1655, although hecorrects the error in a note to the passage in the first volume. Thefollowing is the statement of the case in the Massachusetts colonialrecords, under the date of May 14, 1656:--

 "The magistrates not receiving the verdict of the jury in Mrs. Hibbins her case, having been on trial for witchcraft, it came and fell, of course, to the General Court. Mrs. Ann Hibbins was called forth, appeared at the bar, the indictment against her was read; to which she answered, 'Not guilty, ' and was willing to be tried by God and this Court. The evidence against her was read, the parties witnessing being present, her answers considered on; and the whole Court, being met together, by their vote, determined that Mrs. Ann Hibbins is guilty of witchcraft, according to the bill of indictment found against her by the jury of life and death. The Governor, in open Court, pronounced sentence accordingly; declaring she was to go from the bar to the place from whence she came, and from thence to the place of execution, and there to hang till she was dead. 

 "It is ordered, that warrant shall issue out from the secretary to the marshal general, for the execution of Mrs. Hibbins, on the fifth day next come fortnight, presently after the lecture at Boston, being the 19th of June next; the marshal general taking with him a sufficient guard. "

Mrs. Hibbins is stated to have been a sister of Richard Bellingham, atthat very time deputy-governor, and always regarded as one of thechief men in the country. Strange to say, very little notice appearsto have been taken of this event, beyond the immediate locality; butwhat little has come down to us indicates that it was a case ofoutrageous folly and barbarity, justly reflecting infamy upon thecommunity at the time. Hutchinson, who wrote a hundred years after theevent, and evidently had no other foundation for his opinion thanvague conjectural tradition, gives the following explanation of theproceedings against her: "Losses, in the latter part of her husband'slife, had reduced his estate, and increased the natural crabbedness ofhis wife's temper, which made her turbulent and quarrelsome, andbrought her under church censures, and at length rendered her soodious to her neighbors as to cause some of them to accuse her ofwitchcraft. "

While this is hardly worthy of being considered a sufficientexplanation of the matter, --it being beyond belief, that, even at thattime, a person could be condemned and executed merely on account of a"crabbed temper, "--it is not consistent with the facts, as made knownto us from the record-offices. She could not have been so reduced incircumstances as to produce such extraordinary effects upon hercharacter, for she left a good estate. The truth is, that the tongueof slander was let loose upon her, and the calumnies circulated byreckless gossip became so magnified and exaggerated, and assumed suchproportions, as enabled her vilifiers to bring her under the censureof the church, and that emboldened them to cry out against her as awitch. Hutchinson expresses the opinion that she was the victim ofpopular clamor. But that alone, without some pretence or show ofevidence, could not have brought the General Court, in reversal of thejudgment of the magistrates, to condemn to death a person of such ahigh social position. 

The only clue we have to the kind of evidence bearing upon the chargeof witchcraft that brought this recently bereaved widow to so crueland shameful a death, is in a letter, written by a clergyman inJamaica to Increase Mather in 1684, in which he says, "You mayremember what I have sometimes told you your famous Mr. Norton oncesaid at his own table, --before Mr. Wilson, the pastor, elder Penn, andmyself and wife, &c. , who had the honor to be his guests, --that one ofyour magistrate's wives, as I remember, was hanged for a witch onlyfor having more wit than her neighbors. It was his very expression;she having, as he explained it, unhappily guessed that two of herpersecutors, whom she saw talking in the street, were talking of her, which, proving true, cost her her life, notwithstanding all he coulddo to the contrary, as he himself told us. " Nothing was more naturalthan for her to suppose, knowing the parties, witnessing theirmanner, considering their active co-operation in getting up theexcitement against her, which was then the all-engrossing topic, thatthey were talking about her. But, in the blind infatuation of thetime, it was considered proof positive of her being possessed, by theaid of the Devil, of supernatural insight, --precisely as, forty yearsafterwards, such evidence was brought to bear, with telling effect, against George Burroughs. --The body of this unfortunate lady wassearched for witchmarks, and her trunks and premises rummaged forpuppets. 

It is quite evident that means were used to get up a violent popularexcitement against her, which became so formidable as to silence everyvoice that dared to speak in her favor. Joshua Scottow, a citizen ofgreat respectability and a selectman, ventured to give evidence in herfavor, counter, in its bearings, to some testimony against her; and hewas dealt with very severely, and compelled to write an humble apologyto the Court, to disavow all friendly interest in Mrs. Hibbins, and topray "that the sword of justice may be drawn forth against allwickedness. " He says, "I am cordially sorry that any thing from me, either by word or writing, should give offence to the honored Court, my dear brethren in the church, or any others. "

Hutchinson states that there were, however, some persons then inBoston, who denounced the proceedings against Mrs. Hibbins, andregarded her, not merely as a persecuted woman, but as "a saint;" thata deep feeling of resentment against her persecutors long remained intheir minds; and that they afterwards "observed solemn marks ofProvidence set upon those who were very forward to condemn her. " It isevident that the Court of Magistrates were opposed to her conviction, and that Mr. Norton did what he could to save her. He was one of thefour "great Johns, " who were the first ministers of the church inBoston; and it is remarkable, as showing the violence of the peopleagainst her, that even his influence was of no avail in her favor. Butshe had other friends, as appears from her will, which, after all, isthe only source of reliable information we have respecting hercharacter. It is dated May 27, 1656, a few days after she received thesentence of death. In it she names, as overseers and administrators ofher estate, "Captain Thomas Clarke, Lieutenant Edward Hutchinson, Lieutenant William Hudson, Ensign Joshua Scottow, and Cornet PeterOliver. " In a codicil, she says, "I do earnestly desire my lovingfriends, Captain Johnson and Mr. Edward Rawson, to be added to therest of the gentlemen mentioned as overseers of my will. " It canhardly be doubted, that these persons--and they were all leadingcitizens--were known by her to be among her friends. 

The whole tone and manner of these instruments give evidence, that shehad a mind capable of rising above the power of wrong, suffering, anddeath itself. They show a spirit calm and serene. The disposition ofher property indicates good sense, good feeling, and businessfaculties suitable to the occasion. In the body of the will, there isnot a word, a syllable, or a turn of expression, that refers to, or isin the slightest degree colored by, her peculiar situation. In thecodicil, dated June 16, there is this sentence: "My desire is, thatall my overseers would be pleased to show so much respect unto my deadcorpse as to cause it to be decently interred, and, if it may be, nearmy late husband. "

When married to Mr. Hibbins, she was a widow, named Moore. There wereno children by her last marriage, --certainly none living at the timeof her death. There were three sons by her former marriage, --John, Joseph, and Jonathan. These were all in England; but the youngest, hearing of her situation, embarked for America. When she wrote thecodicil, --three days before her execution, --she added, at the end, having apparently just heard of his coming, "I give my son Jonathantwenty pounds, over and above what I have already given him, towardshis pains and charge in coming to see me, which shall be first paidout of my estate. " There is reason to cherish the belief that hereached her in the short interval between the date of the codicil andher death, from the tenor of the following postscript, written andsigned on the morning of her execution: "My further mind and will is, out of my sense of the more than ordinary affection and pains of myson Jonathan in the times of my distress, I give him, as a furtherlegacy, ten pounds. " The will was proved in Court, July 2, 1656. Thewill and codicil speak of her "farms at Muddy River;" and of chestsand a desk, in which were valuables of such importance that she tookespecial pains to intrust the keys of them to Edward Rawson, in aprovision of the codicil. The estate was inventoried at £344. 14_s. _, which was a considerable property in those days, as money was thenvalued. 

Hutchinson mentions a case of witchcraft in Hartford, in 1662, wheresome women were accused, and, after being proceeded against until theywere confounded and bewildered, one of them made the most preposterousconfessions, which ought to have satisfied every one that her reasonwas overthrown; three of them were condemned, and one, certainly, --probably all, --executed. In 1669, he says that SusannaMartin, of Salisbury, --whom we shall meet again, --was bound over tothe Court on the same charge, "but escaped at that time. " Another caseis mentioned by him as having occurred, in 1671, at Groton, in whichthe party confessed, and thereby avoided condemnation. In 1673, a caseoccurred at Hampton; but the jury, although, as they said, there wasstrong ground of suspicion, returned a verdict of "Not guilty;" theevidence not being deemed quite sufficient. There were several othercases, about this time, in which some persons were severely handled inconsequence of being reputed witches; and others suffered, as theyimagined, "under an evil hand. "

In this immediate neighborhood, there had been several attempts, previous to the delusion at Salem Village in 1692, to get upwitchcraft prosecutions, but without much success. The people of thiscounty had not become sufficiently infected with the fanaticism of thetimes to proceed to extremities. 

In September, 1652, the following presentment was made by the grandjury:--

 "We present John Bradstreet, of Rowley, for suspicion of having familiarity with the Devil. He said he read in a book of magic, and that he heard a voice asking him what work he had for him. He answered, 'Go make a bridge of sand over the sea; go make a ladder of sand up to heaven, and go to God, and come down no more. '

 "Witness hereof, FRANCIS PARAT and his wife, of Rowley. "Witness, WILLIAM BARTHOLOMEW, of Ipswich. "

On the 28th of that month, the jury at Ipswich, "upon examination ofthe case, found he had told a lie, which was a second, being convictedonce before. The Court sets a fine of twenty shillings, or else to bewhipped. "

Bradstreet was probably in the habit of romancing, and it was wiselyconcluded not to take a more serious view of his offences. 

In 1658, a singular case of this kind occurred in Essex County. Thefollowing papers relating to it illustrate the sentiments and forms ofthought prevalent at that time, and give an insight of the state ofsociety in some particulars:--

 _"To the Honored Court to be holden at Ipswich, this twelfth month, '58 or '59. _

 "HONORED GENTLEMEN, --Whereas divers of esteem with us, and as we hear in other places also, have for some time suffered losses in their estates, and some affliction in their bodies also, --which, as they suppose, doth not arise from any natural cause, or any neglect in themselves, but rather from some ill-disposed person, --that, upon differences had betwixt themselves and one John Godfrey, resident at Andover or elsewhere at his pleasure, we whose names are underwritten do make bold to sue by way of request to this honored court, that you, in your wisdom, will be pleased, if you see cause for it, to call him in question, and to hear, at present or at some after sessions, what may be said in this respect. 

 "JAMES DAVIS, Sr. , in the behalf of his son EPHRAIM DAVIS. JOHN HASELDIN, and JANE his wife. ABRAHAM WHITAKER, for his ox and other things. EPHRAIM DAVIS, in the behalf of himself. "

The petitioners mention in brief some instances in confirmation oftheir complaint. There are several depositions. That of Charles Browneand wife says:--

 "About six or seven years since, in the meeting-house of Rowley, being in the gallery in the first seat, there was one in the second seat which he doth, to his best remembrance, think and believe it was John Godfrey. This deponent did see him, yawning, open his mouth; and, while he so yawned, this deponent did see a small teat under his tongue. And, further, this deponent saith that John Godfrey was in this deponent's house about three years since. Speaking about the power of witches, he the said Godfrey spoke, that, if witches were not kindly entertained, the Devil will appear unto them, and ask them if they were grieved or vexed with anybody, and ask them what he should do for them; and, if they would not give them beer or victuals, they might let all the beer run out of the cellar; and, if they looked steadfastly upon any creature, it would die; and, if it were hard to some witches to take away life, either of man or beast, yet, when they once begin it, then it is easy to them. "

The depositions in this case are presented as they are in theoriginals on file, leaving in blank such words or parts of words ashave been worn off. They are given in full. 

 "THE DEPOSITION OF ISABEL HOLDRED, who testifieth that John Godfree came to the house of Henry Blazdall, where her husband and herself were, and demanded a debt of her husband, and said a warrant was out, and Goodman Lord was suddenly to come. John Godfree asked if we would not pay him. The deponent answered, 'Yes, to-night or to-morrow, if we had it; for I believe we shall not ... We are in thy debt. ' John Godfree answered, 'That is a bitter word;' ... Said, 'I must begin, and must send Goodman Lord. ' The deponent answered, '... When thou wilt. I fear thee not, nor all the devils in hell!' And, further, this deponent testifieth, that, two days after this, she was taken with those strange fits, with which she was tormented a fortnight together, night and day. And several apparitions appeared to the deponent in the night. The first night, a humble-bee, the next night a bear, appeared, which grinned the teeth and shook the claw: 'Thou sayest thou art not afraid. Thou thinkest Harry Blazdall's house will save thee. ' The deponent answered, 'I hope the Lord Jesus Christ will save me. ' The apparition then spake: 'Thou sayst thou art not afraid of all the devils in hell; but I will have thy heart's blood within a few hours!' The next was the apparition of a great snake, at which the deponent was exceedingly affrighted, and skipt to Nathan Gold, who was in the opposite chimney-corner, and caught hold of the hair of his head; and her speech was taken away for the space of half an hour. The next night appeared a great horse; and, Thomas Hayne being there, the deponent told him of it, and showed him where. The said Tho. Hayne took a stick, and struck at the place where the apparition was; and his stroke glanced by the side of it, and it went under the table. And he went to strike again; then the apparition fled to the ... And made it shake, and went away. And, about a week after, the deponent ... Son were at the door of Nathan Gold, and heard a rushing on the ... The deponent said to her son, 'Yonder is a beast. ' He answered, ''Tis one of Goodman Cobbye's black oxen;' and it came toward them, and came within ... Yards of them. The deponent her heart began to ache, for it seemed to have great eyes; and spoke to the boy, 'Let's go in. ' But suddenly the ox beat her up against the wall, and struck her down; and she was much hurt by it, not being able to rise up. But some others carried me into the house, all my face being bloody, being much bruised. The boy was much affrighted a long time after; and, for the space of two hours, he was in a sweat that one might have washed hands on his hair. Further this deponent affirmeth, that she hath been often troubled with ... Black cat sometimes appearing in the house, and sometimes in the night ... Bed, and lay on her, and sometimes stroking her face. The cat seemed ... Thrice as big as an ordinary cat. "

 "THOMAS HAYNE testifieth, that, being with Goodwife Holdridge, she told me that she saw a great horse, and showed me where it stood. I then took a stick, and struck on the place, but felt nothing; and I heard the door shake, and Good. H. Said it was gone out at the door. Immediately after, she was taken with extremity of fear and pain, so that she presently fell into a sweat, and I thought she would swoon. She trembled and shook like a leaf. 

 "THOMAS HAYNE. "

 "NATHAN GOULD being with Goodwife Holgreg one night, there appeared a great snake, as she said, with open mouth; and she, being weak, --hardly able to go alone, --yet then ran and laid hold of Nathan Gould by the head, and could not speak for the space of half an hour. 

 "NATHAN GOULD. "

 "WILLIAM OSGOOD testifieth, that, in the yeare '40, in the month of August, --he being then building a barn for Mr. Spencer, --John Godfree being then Mr. Spencer's herdsman, he on an evening came to the frame, where divers men were at work, and said that he had gotten a new master against the time he had done keeping cows. The said William Osgood asked him who it was. He answered, he knew not. He again asked him where he dwelt. He answered, he knew not. He asked him what his name was. He answered, he knew not. He then said to him, 'How, then, wilt thou go to him when thy time is out?' He said, 'The man will come and fetch me then. ' I asked him, 'Hast thou made an absolute bargain?' He answered that a covenant was made, and he had set his hand to it. He then asked of him whether he had not a counter covenant. Godfree answered, 'No. ' W. O. Said, 'What a mad fellow art thou to make a covenant in this manner!' He said, 'He's an honest man. '--'How knowest thou?' said W. O. J. Godfree answered. 'He looks like one. ' W. O. Then answered, 'I am persuaded thou hast made a covenant with the Devil. ' He then skipped about, and said, 'I profess, I profess!'

 WILLIAM OSGOOD. "

The proceedings against Godfrey were carried up to other tribunals, asappears by a record of the County Court at Salem, 28th of June, 1659:--

 "John Godfrey stands bound in one hundred pound bond to the treasurer of this county for his appearance at a General Court, or Court of Assistants, when he shall be legally summonsed thereunto. "

What action, if any, was had by either of these high courts, I havefound no information. But he must have come off unscathed; for, soonafter, he commenced actions in the County Court for defamation againsthis accusers; with the following results:--

 "John Godfery plt. Agst. Will. Simonds & Sam. Ll his son dfts. In an action of slander that the said Sam. Ll son to Will. Simons, hath don him in his name, Charging him to be a witch, the jury find for the plt. 2d damage & cost of Court 29sh. , yet notwithstanding doe conceiue, that by the testmonyes he is rendred suspicious. "

 "John Godfery plt. Agst. Jonathan Singletary defendt. In an action of Slander & Defamation for calling him witch & said is this witch on this side Boston Gallows yet, the attachm. T & other evidences were read, committed to the Jury & are on file. The Jury found for the plt. A publique acknowledgmt, at Haverhill within a month that he hath done the plt. Wrong in his words or 10sh damage & costs of Court £2-16-0. "

In the trial of the case between Godfrey and Singletary, the latterattempted to prove the truth of his allegations against the former, bygiving the following piece of testimony, which, while it failed toconvince the jury, is worth preserving, from the inherent interest ofsome of its details:--

 "Date the fourteenth the twelfth month, '62. --THE DEPOSITION OF JONATHAN SINGLETARY, aged about 23, who testifieth that I, being in the prison at Ipswich this night last past between nine and ten of the clock at night, after the bell had rung, I being set in a corner of the prison, upon a sudden I heard a great noise as if many cats had been climbing up the prison walls, and skipping into the house at the windows, and jumping about the chamber; and a noise as if boards' ends or stools had been thrown about, and men walking in the chambers, and a crackling and shaking as if the house would have fallen upon me. I seeing this, and considering what I knew by a young man that kept at my house last Indian Harvest, and, upon some difference with John Godfre, he was presently several nights in a strange manner troubled, and complaining as he did, and upon consideration of this and other things that I knew by him, I was at present something affrighted; yet considering what I had lately heard made out by Mr. Mitchel at Cambridge, that there is more good in God than there is evil in sin, and that although God is the greatest good, and sin the greatest evil, yet the first Being of evil cannot weane the scales or overpower the first Being of good: so considering that the author of good was of greater power than the author of evil, God was pleased of his goodness to keep me from being out of measure frighted. So this noise abovesaid held as I suppose about a quarter of an hour, and then ceased: and presently I heard the bolt of the door shoot or go back as perfectly, to my thinking, as I did the next morning when the keeper came to unlock it; and I could not see the door open, but I saw John Godfre stand within the door and said, 'Jonathan, Jonathan. ' So I, looking on him, said, 'What have you to do with me?' He said, 'I come to see you: are you weary of your place yet?' I answered, 'I take no delight in being here, but I will be out as soon as I can. ' He said, 'If you will pay me in corn, you shall come out. ' I answered, 'No: if that had been my intent, I would have paid the marshal, and never have come hither. ' He, knocking of his fist at me in a kind of a threatening way, said he would make me weary of my part, and so went away, I knew not how nor which way; and, as I was walking about in the prison, I tripped upon a stone with my heel, and took it up in my hand, thinking that if he came again I would strike at him. So, as I was walking about, he called at the window, 'Jonathan, ' said he, 'if you will pay me corn, I will give you two years day, and we will come to an agreement;' I answered him saying, 'Why do you come dissembling and playing the Devil's part here? Your nature is nothing but envy and malice, which you will vent, though to your own loss; and you seek peace with no man. '--'I do not dissemble, ' said he: 'I will give you my hand upon it, I am in earnest. ' So he put his hand in at the window, and I took hold of it with my left hand, and pulled him to me; and with the stone in my right hand I thought I struck him, and went to recover my hand to strike again, and his hand was gone, and I would have struck, but there was nothing to strike: and how he went away I know not; for I could neither feel when his hand went out of mine, nor see which way he went. "

It can hardly be doubted, that Singletary's story was the result ofthe workings of an excited imagination, in wild and frightful dreamsunder the spasms of nightmare. We shall meet similar phenomena, whenwe come to the testimony in the trials of 1692. 

Godfrey was a most eccentric character. He courted and challenged theimputation of witchcraft, and took delight in playing upon thecredulity of his neighbors, enjoying the exhibition of theiramazement, horror, and consternation. He was a person of muchnotoriety, had more lawsuits, it is probable, than any other man inthe colony, and in one instance came under the criminal jurisdictionfor familiarity with other than immaterial spirits; for we find, bythe record of Sept. 25, 1666, that John Godfrey was "fined for beingdrunk. "

I have allowed so much space to the foregoing documents, because theyshow the fancies which, fermenting in the public mind, and inflamed bythe prevalent literature, theology, and philosophy, came to a headthirty years afterwards; and because they prove that in 1660 aconviction for witchcraft could not be obtained in this county. Theevidence against none of the convicts in 1692, throwing out of viewthe statements and actings of the "afflicted children, " was half sostrong as that against Godfrey. Short work would have been made withhim then. 

There is one particularly interesting item in Singletary'sdeposition. It illustrates the value of good preaching. This youngman, in his gloomy prison, and overwhelmed with the terrors ofsuperstition, found consolation, courage, and strength in what heremembered of a sermon, to which he had happened to listen, from"Matchless Mitchel. " It was indeed good doctrine; and it is to belamented that it was not carried out to its logical conclusions, andconstantly enforced by the divines of that and subsequent times. 

In November, 1669, there was a prosecution of "Goody Burt, " a widow, concerning whom the most marvellous stories were told. The principalwitness against her was Philip Reed, a physician, who on oath declaredhis belief that "no natural cause" could produce such effects as werewrought by Goody Burt upon persons whom she afflicted. Her range ofoperations seems to have been confined to Marblehead, Lynn, Salem, andthe vicinity: as nothing more was ever heard of the case, anotherevidence is afforded, that an Essex jury, notwithstanding thispositive opinion of a doctor, was not ready to convict on the chargeof witchcraft. This same Philip Reed tried very hard to prosecuteproceedings, eleven years afterwards, against Margaret Gifford as awitch. But she failed to appear, and no effort is recorded as havingbeen made to apprehend her. 

In 1673, Eunice Cole, of Hampton, was tried before a county court, atSalisbury, on the charge of witchcraft; and she was committed to jail, in Boston, for further proceedings. She was subsequently indicted bythe Grand Jury for the Massachusetts jurisdiction for "familiaritywith the Devil. " The Court of Assistants found that there was "justground of vehement suspicion of her having had familiarity with theDevil, " and got rid of the case by ordering her "to depart from andabide out of this jurisdiction. "

At a County Court, held at Salem, Nov. 24, 1674, a case was broughtup, of which the following is all we know:--

 "Christopher Browne having reported that he had been treating or discoursing with one whom he apprehended to be the Devil, which came like a gentleman, in order to his binding himself to be a servant to him, upon his examination, his discourse seeming inconsistent with truth, &c. , the Court, giving him good counsel and caution, for the present dismiss him. "

It would have been well if the action of this Court had been followedas an authoritative precedent. 

In the year 1679, the house of William Morse, of Newbury, was, formore than two months, infested in a most strange and vexatious manner. The affair was brought into court, where it played a conspicuous part, and was near reaching a tragical conclusion. The history of theproceedings in reference to it is very curious. 

Mr. John Woodbridge, of Newbury, had been for some time an associatecounty judge, and was commissioned to administer oaths and joinpersons in marriage. The following is a record of what occurredbefore him, sitting as a magistrate, and as a commissioner toadjudicate in small, local causes, and hold examinations in mattersthat went to higher courts:--

 "Dec. 3, 1679. --Caleb Powell, being complained of for suspicion of working with the Devil to the molesting of William Morse and his family, was by warrant directed to the constable brought in by him. The accusation and testimonies were read, and the complaint respited till the Monday following. 

 "Dec. 8, 1679. --Caleb Powell appeared according to order, and further testimony produced against him by William Morse, which being read and considered, it was determined that the said William Morse should prosecute the case against said Powell at the County Court to be held at Ipswich the last Tuesday in March ensuing; and, in order hereunto, William Morse acknowledgeth himself indebted to the Treasurer of the County of Essex the full sum of twenty pounds. The condition of this obligation is, that the said William Morse shall prosecute his complaint against Caleb Powell at that Court. 

 "Caleb Powell was delivered as a prisoner to the constable till he could find security of twenty pounds for the answering of the said complaint, or else he was to be carried to prison. 

 "JO: WOODBRIDGE, _Commissioner_. "

Powell was accordingly brought before the Court at Ipswich, March 30, 1680, under an indictment for witchcraft. Before giving the substanceof the evidence adduced on this occasion, it will be well to mentionthe manner in which he got into the case as a principal. He was amate of a vessel. While at home, between voyages, he happened to hearof the wonderful occurrences at Mr. Morse's house. His curiosity wasawakened, and he was also actuated by feelings of commiseration forthe family under the torments and terrors with which they were said tobe afflicted. Determined to see what it all meant, and to put a stopto it if he could, he went to the house, and soon became satisfiedthat a roguish grandchild was the cause of all the trouble. Heprevailed upon the old grandparents to let him take off the boy. Immediately upon his removal, the difficulty ceased. 

New-England navigators, at that time and long afterwards, sailedalmost wholly by the stars; and Powell probably had often related hisown skill, which, as mate of a vessel, he would have been likely toacquire, in calculating his position, rate of sailing, and distances, on the boundless and trackless ocean, by his knowledge andobservations of the heavenly bodies. He had said, perhaps, that, bygazing among the stars, he could, at any hour of the night, howeverlong or far he had been tossed and driven on the ocean, tell exactlywhere his vessel was. Hence the charge of being an astrologist. Probably, like other sailors, Powell may have indulged in "long yarns"to the country people, of the wonders he had seen, "some in onecountry, and some in another. " It is not unlikely, that, in foreignports, he had witnessed exhibitions of necromancy and mesmerism, which, in various forms and under different names, have always beenpractised. Possibly he may have boasted to be a medium himself, ascholar and adept in the mystic art, able to read and divine "theworkings of spirits. " At any rate, when it became known, that, at aglance, he attributed to the boy the cause of the mischief, and thatit ceased on his taking him away from the house, the opinion becamesettled that he was a wizard. He was arrested forthwith, and broughtto trial, as has been stated, for witchcraft. His astronomy, astrology, and spiritualism brought him in peril of his life. 

 "THE TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM MORSE: which saith, together with his wife, aged both about sixty-five years: that, Thursday night, being the twenty-seventh day of November, we heard a great noise without, round the house, of knocking the boards of the house, and, as we conceived, throwing of stones against the house. Whereupon myself and wife looked out and saw nobody, and the boy all this time with us; but we had stones and sticks thrown at us, that we were forced to retire into the house again. Afterwards we went to bed, and the boy with us; and then the like noise was upon the roof of the house. 

 "2. The same night about midnight, the door being locked when we went to bed, we heard a great hog in the house grunt and make a noise, as we thought willing to get out; and, that we might not be disturbed in our sleep, I rose to let him out, and I found a hog in the house and the door unlocked: the door was firmly locked when we went to bed. 

 "3. The next morning, a stick of links hanging in the chimney, they were thrown out of their place, and we hanged them up again, and they were thrown down again, and some into the fire. 

 "4. The night following, I had a great awl lying in the window, the which awl we saw fall down out of the chimney into the ashes by the fire. 

 "5. After this, I bid the boy put the same awl into the cupboard, which we saw done, and the door shut to: this same awl came presently down the chimney again in our sight, and I took it up myself. Again, the same night, we saw a little Indian basket, that was in the loft before, come down the chimney again. And I took the same basket, and put a piece of brick into it, and the basket with the brick was gone, and came down again the third time with the brick in it, and went up again the fourth time, and came down again without the brick; and the brick came down again a little after. 

 "6. The next day, being Saturday, stones, sticks, and pieces of bricks came down, so that we could not quietly dress our breakfast; and sticks of fire also came down at the same time. 

 "7. That day in the afternoon, my thread four times taken away, and came down the chimney; again, my awl and gimlet, wanting, came down the chimney; again, my leather, taken away, came down the chimney; again, my nails, being in the cover of a firkin, taken away, came down the chimney. Again, the same night, the door being locked, a little before day, hearing a hog in the house, I rose, and saw the hog to be mine: I let him out. 

 "8. The next day being sabbath-day, many stones and sticks and pieces of bricks came down the chimney: on the Monday, Mr. Richardson and my brother being there, the frame of my cowhouse they saw very firm. I sent my boy out to scare the fowls from my hog's meat: he went to the cowhouse, and it fell down, my boy crying with the hurt of the fall. In the afternoon, the pots hanging over the fire did dash so vehemently one against the other, we set down one that they might not dash to pieces. I saw the andiron leap into the pot, and dance and leap out, and again leap in and dance and leap out again, and leap on a table and there abide, and my wife saw the andiron on the table: also I saw the pot turn itself over, and throw down all the water. Again, we saw a tray with wool leap up and down, and throw the wool out, and so many times, and saw nobody meddle with it. Again, a tub his hoop fly off of itself and the tub turn over, and nobody near it. Again, the woollen wheel turned upside down, and stood up on its end, and a spade set on it; Steph. Greenleafe saw it, and myself and my wife. Again, my rope-tools fell down upon the ground before my boy could take them, being sent for them; and the same thing of nails tumbled down from the loft into the ground, and nobody near. Again, my wife and boy making the bed, the chest did open and shut: the bed-clothes could not be made to lie on the bed, but fly off again. 

 "Again, Caleb Powell came in, and, being affected to see our trouble, did promise me and my wife, that, if we would be willing to let him keep the boy, we should see ourselves that we should be never disturbed while he was gone with him: he had the boy, and had been quiet ever since. 

 "THO. ROGERS and GEORGE HARDY, being at William Morse his house, affirm that the earth in the chimney-corner moved, and scattered on them; that Tho. Rogers was hit with somewhat, Hardy with an iron ladle as is supposed. Somewhat hit William Morse a great blow, but it was so swift that they could not certainly tell what it was; but, looking down after they heard the noise, they saw a shoe. The boy was in the corner at the first, afterwards in the house. 

 "Mr. RICHARDSON on Saturday testifieth that a board flew against his chair, and he heard a noise in another room, which he supposed in all reason to be diabolical. 

 "JOHN DOLE saw a pine stick of candlewood to fall down, a stone, a firebrand; and these things he saw not what way they came, till they fell down by him. 

 "The same affirmed by John Tucker: the boy was in one corner, whom they saw and observed all the while, and saw no motion in him. 

 "ELIZABETH TITCOMB affirmeth that Powell said that he could find the witch by his learning, if he had another scholar with him: this she saith were his expressions, to the best of her memory. 

 "JO. TUCKER affirmeth that Powell said to him, he saw the boy throw the shoe while he was at prayer. 

 "JO. EMERSON affirmeth that Powell said he was brought up under Norwood; and it was judged by the people there, that Norwood studied the black art. 

 "A FURTHER TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM MORSE AND HIS WIFE. --We saw a keeler of bread turn over against me, and struck me, not any being near it, and so overturned. I saw a chair standing in the house, and not anybody near: it did often bow towards me, and so rise up again. My wife also being in the chamber, the chamber-door did violently fly together, not anybody being near it. My wife, going to make a bed, it did move to and fro, not anybody being near it. I also saw an iron wedge and spade was flying out of the chamber on my wife, and did not strike her. My wife going into the cellar, a drum, standing in the house, did roll over the door of the cellar; and, being taken up again, the door did violently fly down again. My barn-doors four times unpinned, I know not how. I, going to shut my barn-door, looking for the pin, --the boy being with me, as I did judge, --the pin, coming down out of the air, did fall down near to me. Again, Caleb Powell came in, as beforesaid, and, seeing our spirits very low by the sense of our great affliction, began to bemoan our condition, and said that he was troubled for our afflictions, and said that he had eyed this boy, and drawed near to us with great compassion: 'Poor old man, poor old woman! this boy is the occasion of your grief; for he hath done these things, and hath caused his good old grandmother to be counted a witch. ' 'Then, ' said I, 'how can all these things be done by him?' Said he, 'Although he may not have done all, yet most of them; for this boy is a young rogue, a vile rogue: I have watched him, and see him do things as to come up and down. ' Caleb Powell also said he had understanding in astrology and astronomy, and knew the working of spirits, some in one country, and some in another; and, looking on the boy, said, 'You young rogue, to begin so soon. Goodman Morse, if you be willing to let me have this boy, I will undertake you shall be free from any trouble of this kind while he is with me. ' I was very unwilling at the first, and my wife; but, by often urging me, till he told me whither, and what employment and company, he should go, I did consent to it, and this was before Jo. Badger came; and we have been freed from any trouble of this kind ever since that promise, made on Monday night last, to this time, being Friday in the afternoon. Then we heard a great noise in the other room, oftentimes, but, looking after it, could not see any thing; but, afterwards looking into the room, we saw a board hanged to the press. Then we, being by the fire, sitting in a chair, my chair often would not stand still, but ready to throw me backward oftentimes. Afterward, my cap almost taken off my head three times. Again, a great blow on my poll, and my cat did leap from me into the chimney corner. Presently after, this cat was thrown at my wife. We saw the cat to be ours: we put her out of the house, and shut the door. Presently, the cat was throwed into the house. We went to go to bed. Suddenly, --my wife being with me in bed, the lamp-light by our side, --my cat again throwed at us five times, jumping away presently into the floor; and, one of those times, a red waistcoat throwed on the bed, and the cat wrapped up in it. Again, the lamp, standing by us on the chest, we said it should stand and burn out; but presently was beaten down, and all the oil shed, and we left in the dark. Again, a great voice, a great while, very dreadful. Again, in the morning, a great stone, being six-pound weight, did remove from place to place, --we saw it, --two spoons throwed off the table, and presently the table throwed down. And, being minded to write, my inkhorn was hid from me, which I found, covered with a rag, and my pen quite gone. I made a new pen; and, while I was writing, one ear of corn hit me in the face, and fire, sticks, and stones throwed at me, and my pen brought to me. While I was writing with my new pen, my inkhorn taken away: and, not knowing how to write any more, we looked under the table, and there found him; and so I was able to write again. Again, my wife her hat taken from her head, sitting by the fire by me, the table almost thrown down. Again, my spectacles thrown from the table, and thrown almost into the fire by me, and my wife and the boy. Again, my book of all my accounts thrown into the fire, and had been burnt presently, if I had not taken it up. Again, boards taken off a tub, and set upright by themselves; and my paper, do what I could, hardly keep it while I was writing this relation, and things thrown at me while a-writing. Presently, before I could dry my writing, a mormouth hat rubbed along it; but I held so fast that it did blot but some of it. My wife and I, being much afraid that I should not preserve it for public use, did think best to lay it in the Bible, and it lay safe that night. Again, the next, I would lay it there again; but, in the morning, it was not there to be found, the bag hanged down empty; but, after, was found in a box alone. Again, while I was writing this morning, I was forced to forbear writing any more, I was so disturbed with so many things constantly thrown at me. 

 "This relation brought in Dec. 8. 

 "I, ANTHONY MORSE, occasionally being at my brother Morse's house, my brother showed me a piece of a brick which had several times come down the chimney. I sitting in the corner, I took the piece of brick in my hand. Within a little space of time, the piece of brick was gone from me, I knew not by what means. Quickly after, the piece of brick came down the chimney. Also, in the chimney-corner I saw a hammer on the ground: there being no person near the hammer, it was suddenly gone, by what means I know not. But, within a little space after, the hammer came down the chimney. And, within a little space of time after that, came a piece of wood down the chimney, about a foot long; and, within a little after that, came down a firebrand, the fire being out. This was about ten days ago. 

 "JOHN BADGER affirmeth, that, being at William Morse his house, and heard Caleb Powell say that he thought by astrology, and I think he said by astronomy too, with it, he could find out whether or no there were diabolical means used about the said Morse his trouble, and that the said Caleb said he thought to try to find it out. 

 "THE DEPOSITION OF MARY TUCKER, aged about twenty. --She remembered that Caleb Powell came into her house, and said to this purpose: That he, coming to William Morse his house, and the old man, being at prayer, he thought not fit to go in, but looked in at the window; and he said he had broken the enchantment; for he saw the boy play tricks while he was at prayer, and mentioned some, and, among the rest, that he saw him to fling the shoe at the said Morse's head. 

 "Taken on oath, March 29, 1680, before me, "JO: WOODBRIDGE, _Commissioner_. 

 "Mary Richardson confirmed the truth of the above written testimony, on oath, at the same time. "

There seem to have been several hearings before CommissionerWoodbridge. The boy had returned to his grandparents before the lastdeposition of William Morse, and his audacious operations werepersisted in to the last. The final decision of the Court was asfollows:--

 "Upon the hearing the complaint brought to this Court against Caleb Powell for suspicion of working by the Devil to the molesting of the family of William Morse of Newbury, though this court cannot find any evident ground of proceeding further against the said Caleb Powell, yet we determine that he hath given such ground of suspicion of his so dealing that we cannot so acquit him, but that he justly deserves to bear his own share and the costs of the prosecution of the complaint. 

 "Referred to Mr. Woodbridge to examine and determine the charges. "

The entry of this sentence, in the records of the County Court, is asfollows; the clerk strangely mistaking the name of the party:--

 "The Court held at Ipswich, the 30th of March, 1680. 

 "In the case of Abell Powell, though the Court do not see sufficient to charge further, yet find so much suspicion as that he pay the charges. The ordering of the charges left to Mr. Jo: Woodbridge. "

The matter of Powell's connection with the affair being thus disposedof, and no one seeming to entertain his idea of the guilt of the boy, the next step was to fasten suspicion upon the good old grandmother;and a general outcry was raised against her. Her arrest andcondemnation were clamored for. But the result of Powell's trial, andall preceding cases, showed that an Essex jury could not yet be reliedon for a conviction in witchcraft cases; and it was resolved toinstitute proceedings in a more favorable quarter. The Grand Juryreturned a bill of indictment against her to the Court of Assistants, sitting in Boston. This was the highest tribunal in the country, subject only to the General Court, and embracing the whole colony inits jurisdiction. The following is the substance of the record of thecase:--

At a Court of Assistants, on adjournment, held at Boston, on the 20thof May, 1680. 

The Grand Jury having presented Elizabeth Morse, wife of WilliamMorse, she was tried and convicted of the crime of witchcraft. TheGovernor, on the 27th of May, "after the lecture, " in the FirstChurch of Boston, pronounced the sentence of death upon her. On the1st of June, the Governor and Assistants voted to reprieve her "untilthe next session of the Court in Boston. " At the said next session, the reprieval was still further continued. This seems to have producedmuch dissatisfaction, as is shown by the following extract from therecords of the House of Deputies:--

 "The Deputies, on perusal of the Acts of the Honored Court of Assistants, relating to the woman condemned for witchcraft, do not understand the reason why the sentence, given against her by said Court, is not executed: and the second reprieval seems to us beyond what the law will allow, and do therefore judge meet to declare ourselves against it, with reference to the concurrence of the honored magistrates hereto. 

 WILLIAM TORREY, _Clerk_. "

The action of the magistrates, on this reference, is recorded asfollows:--

 "3d of November, 1680. --Not consented to by magistrates. 

 EDWARD RAWSON, Secretary. "

The evidence against Mrs. Morse was frivolous to the last degree, without any of the force and effect given to support the prosecutionsin Salem, twelve years afterwards, by the astounding confessions ofthe accused, and the splendid acting of the "afflicted children;" yetshe was tried and condemned in Boston, and sentenced there on"Lecture-day. " The representatives of the people, in the House ofDeputies, cried out against her reprieve. She was saved by thecourage and wisdom of Governor Bradstreet, subsequently a resident ofSalem, where his ashes rest. He was living here, at the age of ninetyyears, during the witchcraft prosecutions in 1692; but, old as he was, he made known his entire disapprobation of them. It is safe to say, that, if he had not been superseded by the arrival of Sir WilliamPhipps as governor under the new charter, they would never have takenplace. Notwithstanding all this, --in spite of the remonstrances, atthe time, of Brattle, and afterwards of Hutchinson, --Boston and othertowns (earlier, if not equally, committed to such proceedings) have, by a sort of general conspiracy, joined the rest of the world intrying to throw and fasten the whole responsibility and disgrace ofwitchcraft prosecutions upon Salem. 

Things continued in the condition just described, --Mrs. Morse in jailunder sentence of death; that sentence suspended by reprieves from theGovernor, from time to time, until the next year, when her husband, inher behalf and in her name, presented an earnest and touching petition"to the honored Governor, Deputy-governor, Magistrates, and Deputiesnow assembled in Court, May the 18th, 1681, " that her case might beconcluded, one way or another. After referring to her condemnation, and to her attestation of innocence, she says, "By the mercy of God, and the goodness of the honored Governor, I am reprieved. " She begsthe Court to "hearken to her cry, a poor prisoner. " She places herselfat the foot of the tribunal of the General Court: "I now stand humblypraying your justice in hearing my case, and to determine therein asthe Lord shall direct. I do not understand law, nor do I know how tolay my case before you as I ought; for want of which I humbly beg ofyour honors that my request may not be rejected. " The House ofDeputies, on the 24th of May, voted to give her a new trial. But themagistrates refused to concur in the vote; and so the matter stood, for how long a time there are, I believe, no means of knowing. Finally, however, she was released from prison, and allowed to returnto her own house. This we learn from a publication made by Mr. Hale, of Beverly, in 1697. It seems, that, after getting her out of prisonand restored to her home, to use Mr. Hale's words, "her husband, whowas esteemed a sincere and understanding Christian by those that knewhim, desired some neighbor ministers, of whom I was one, to discoursehis wife, which we did; and her discourse was very Christian, andstill pleaded her innocence as to that which was laid to her charge. "From Mr. Hale's language, it may be inferred that she had not beenpardoned or discharged, but still lay under sentence of death, afterher removal to her own house: for he and his brethren did not "esteemit prudence to pass any definite sentence upon one under hercircumstances;" but they ventured to say that they were "inclined tothe more charitable side. " Mr. Hale states, that, "in her lastsickness, she was in much trouble and darkness of spirit, whichoccasioned a judicious friend to examine her strictly, whether shehad been guilty of witchcraft; but she said _no_, but the ground ofher trouble was some impatient and passionate speeches and actions ofhers while in prison, upon the account of her suffering wrongfully, whereby she had provoked the Lord by putting contempt upon his Word. And, in fine, she sought her pardon and comfort from God in Christ;and died, so far as I understand, praying to and relying upon God inChrist for salvation. "

The cases of Margaret Jones, Ann Hibbins, and Elizabeth Morseillustrate strikingly and fully the history and condition of thepublic mind in New England, and the world over, in reference towitchcraft in the seventeenth century. They show that there wasnothing unprecedented, unusual, or eminently shocking, after all, inwhat I am about to relate as occurring in Salem, in 1692. The onlyreal offence proved upon Margaret Jones was that she was a successfulpractitioner of medicine, using only simple remedies. Ann Hibbins wasthe victim of the slanderous gossip of a prejudiced neighborhood; allour actual knowledge of her being her Will, which proves that she wasa person of much more than ordinary dignity of mind, which was keptunruffled and serene in the bitterest trials and most outrageouswrongs which it is possible for folly and "man's inhumanity to man" tobring upon us in this life. Elizabeth Morse appears to have been oneof the best of Christian women. The accusations against them, as awhole, cover nearly the whole ground upon which the subsequentprosecutions in Salem rested. John Winthrop passed sentence uponMargaret Jones, John Endicott upon Ann Hibbins, and Simon Bradstreetupon Elizabeth Morse. The last-named governor performed the office asan unavoidable act of official duty, and prevented the execution ofthe sentence by the courageous use of his prerogative, in defiance ofpublic clamor and the wrath of the representatives of the whole peopleof the colony. These facts sufficiently show, that the proceedingsafterwards had in Salem accorded with those in like cases, of that andpreceding generations; and were sanctioned by the all but universalsentiments of mankind and a uniform chain of precedents. 

The trial of Bridget Bishop, in 1680, before the County Court atSalem, for witchcraft, and her acquittal, have already been mentionedin the account of Salem Village, in the First Part. 

In 1688, an Irish woman, named Glover, was executed in Boston forbewitching four children belonging to the family of a Mr. Goodwin. Shewas a Roman Catholic, represented to have been quite an ignorantperson, and seems, moreover, from the accounts given of her, to havebeen crazy. The oldest of the children was only about thirteen yearsof age. The most experienced physicians pronounced them bewitched. Their conduct, as it is related by Cotton Mather, was indeed veryextraordinary. At one time they would bark like dogs, and then againthey would purr like cats. "Yea, " says he, "they would fly likegeese, and be carried with an incredible swiftness, having but justtheir toes now and then upon the ground, sometimes not once in twentyfeet, and their arms waved like the wings of a bird. "

One of the children seems to have had a genius scarcely inferior tothat of Master Burke himself: there was no part nor passion she couldnot enact. She would complain that the old Irish woman had tied aninvisible noose round her neck, and was choking her; and hercomplexion and features would instantly assume the various hues andviolent distortions natural to a person in such a predicament. Shewould declare that an invisible chain was fastened to one of herlimbs, and would limp about precisely as though it were really thecase. She would say that she was in an oven; the perspiration woulddrop from her face, and she would exhibit every appearance of beingroasted: then she would cry out that cold water was thrown upon her, and her whole frame would shiver and shake. She pretended that theevil spirit came to her in the shape of an invisible horse; and shewould canter, gallop, trot, and amble round the rooms and entries insuch admirable imitation, that an observer could hardly believe that ahorse was not beneath her, and bearing her about. She would go upstairs with exactly such a toss and bound as a person on horsebackwould exhibit. 

After some time, Cotton Mather took her into his own family, to seewhether he could not exorcise her. His account of her conduct, whilethere, is highly amusing for its credulous simplicity. The cunning andingenious child seems to have taken great delight in perplexing andplaying off her tricks upon the learned man. Once he wished to saysomething in her presence, to a third person, which he did not intendshe should understand. He accordingly spoke in Latin. But she hadpenetration enough to conjecture what he had said: he was amazed. Hethen tried Greek: she was equally successful. He next spoke in Hebrew:she instantly detected the meaning. At last he resorted to the Indianlanguage, and that she pretended not to know. He drew the conclusionthat the evil being with whom she was in compact was acquaintedfamiliarly with the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, but not with the Indiantongue. 

It is curious to notice how adroitly she fell into the line of hisprejudices. He handed her a book written by a Quaker, to which sect itis well known he was violently opposed: she would read it off withgreat ease, rapidity, and pleasure. A book written against the Quakersshe could not read at all. She could read Popish books, but could notdecipher a syllable of the Assembly's Catechism. Dr. Mather wasearnestly opposed to the order and liturgy of the Church of England. The artful little girl worked with great success upon this prejudice. She pretended to be very fond of the Book of Common Prayer, and calledit her Bible. It would relieve her of her sufferings, in a moment, toput it into her hands. While she could not read a word of theScriptures in the Bible, she could read them very easily in thePrayer-book; but she could not read the Lord's Prayer even in this herfavorite volume. All these things went far to strengthen theconviction of Dr. Mather that she was in league with the Devil; forthis was the only explanation that could be given to satisfy his mindof her partiality to the productions of Quakers, Catholics, andEpiscopalians, and her aversion to the Bible and the Catechism. 

She exhibited the most exquisite ingenuity in beguiling Dr. Mather bythe force of a charm, the power of which he could not resist for amoment, --flattery. He thus describes, with a complacency but thinlyconcealed under the veil of affected modesty, the part she played, inorder to give the impression--which it was the great object of hisambition to make upon the public mind--that the Devil stood in specialfear of his presence:--

 "There then stood open the study of one belonging to the family, into which, entering, she stood immediately on her feet, and cried out, 'They are gone! they are gone! They say that they cannot, --God won't let 'em come here!' adding a reason for it which the owner of the study thought more kind than true; and she presently and perfectly came to herself, so that her whole discourse and carriage was altered into the greatest measure of sobriety. "

Upon quitting the study, "the demons" would instantly again take holdof her. Mather continues the statement, by saying that some persons, wishing to try the experiment, had her brought "up into the study;"but he says that she at once became--

 "so strangely distorted, that it was an extreme difficulty to drag her up stairs. The demons would pull her out of the people's hands, and make her heavier than, perhaps, three of herself. With incredible toil (though she kept screaming, 'They say I must not go in'), she was pulled in; where she was no sooner got, but she could stand on her feet, and, with altered note, say, 'Now I am well. ' She would be faint at first, and say 'she felt something to go out of her' (the noises whereof we sometimes heard like those of a mouse); but, in a minute or two, she could apply herself to devotion. To satisfy some strangers, the experiment was, divers times, with the same success, repeated, until my lothness to have any thing done like making a charm of a room, caused me to forbid the repetition of it. "

Even in her most riotous proceedings, she kept her eye fixed upon thedoctor's weak point. When he called the family to prayers, she wouldwhistle and sing and yell to drown his voice, would strike him withher fist, and try to kick him. But her hand or foot would alwaysrecoil when within an inch or two of his body; thus giving the ideathat there was a sort of invisible coat of mail, of heavenly temper, and proof against the assaults of the Devil, around his sacred person!After a while, Dr. Mather concluded to prepare an account of theseextraordinary circumstances, wherewithal to entertain his congregationin a sermon. She seemed to be quite displeased at the thought of hismaking public the doings of her master, the Evil One, attempted toprevent his writing the intended sermon, and disturbed and interruptedhim in all manner of ways. For instance, she once knocked at his studydoor, and said that "there was somebody down stairs that would be gladto see him. " He dropped his pen, and went down. Upon entering theroom, he found nobody there but the family. The next time he met her, he undertook to chide her for having told him a falsehood. She deniedthat she had told a falsehood. "Didn't you say, " said he, "that therewas somebody down stairs that would be glad to see me?"--"Well, " shereplied, with inimitable pertness, "is not Mrs. Mather always glad tosee you?"

She even went much farther than this in persecuting the good man whilehe was writing his sermon: she threw large books at his head. But hestruggled manfully against these buffetings of Satan, as he consideredher conduct to be, finished the sermon, related all thesecircumstances in it, preached, and published it. Richard Baxter wrotethe preface to an edition printed in London, in which he declares thathe who will not be convinced by all the evidence Dr. Mather presentsthat the child was bewitched "must be a very obdurate Sadducee. " It isso obvious, that, in this whole affair, Cotton Mather was grosslydeceived and audaciously imposed upon by the most consummate andprecocious cunning, that it needs no comment. I have given thisparticular account of it, because there is reason to believe that itoriginated the delusion in Salem. It occurred only four years before. Dr. Mather's account of the transaction filled the whole country; andit is probable that the children in Mr. Parris's family undertook tore-enact it. 

There is nothing in the annals of the histrionic art more illustrativeof the infinite versatility of the human faculties, both physical andmental, and of the amazing extent to which cunning, ingenuity, contrivance, quickness of invention, and presence of mind can becultivated, even in very young persons, than such cases as this justrelated. It seems, at first, incredible that a mere child could carryon such a complex piece of fraud and imposture as that enacted by thelittle girl whose achievements have been immortalized by the famousauthor of the "Magnalia. " Many other instances, however, are foundrecorded in the history of the delusion we are discussing. 

That of the grandchild of William and Elizabeth Morse, in Newbury, wasnearly as marvellous, and perfectly successful in deceiving the wholecountry except Caleb Powell; and he got into much trouble inconsequence of seeing through it. A similar instance of juvenileimposture is related as having occurred at Amsterdam in 1560. Twentyor thirty boys pretended to be suddenly seized with a kind of rage andfury, were cast upon the ground, and tormented with great agony. Thesefits were intermittent; and, when they had passed off, their subjectsdid not seem to be conscious of what had taken place. While theylasted, the boys threw up, apparently from their stomachs, largequantities of needles, pins, thimbles, pieces of cloth, fragments ofpots and kettles, bits of glass, locks of hair, and a variety of otherarticles. There was no doubt, at the time, that they were sufferingunder the influence of the Devil; and multitudes crowded round them, and gazed upon them with wonder and horror. 

The details of the cases in Newbury and Charlestown were dressed up byCotton Mather and other writers in the strongest colors that creduloussuperstition and the peculiar views of that age on the subject ofdemonology could employ. They were almost universally received asproof that Satan had commenced an onslaught, such as had never beforebeen known, upon the Church and the world! They appear to us as simplyabsurd, and the result of precocious knavery; not so to the people ofthat generation. They were looked upon as fearful demonstrations ofdiabolical power, and preludes to the coming of Satan, with hisinfernal confederates, to overwhelm the land. The imaginations of allwere excited, and their apprehensions morbidly aroused. The very airwas filled with rumors, fancies, and fears. The ministers sounded thealarm from their pulpits. The magistrates sharpened the sword ofjustice. The deputy-governor of the colony, Danforth, began to arrestsuspected persons months before proceedings commenced, or were thoughtof, in Salem Village. It was believed that evil spirits had been seen, by men's bodily eyes, in a neighboring town. They glided over thefields, hovered around the houses, appeared, vanished, andre-appeared on the outskirts of the woods, in the vicinity ofGloucester. Their movements were observed by several of theinhabitants; and the whole population of the Cape was kept in a stateof agitation and alarm, in consequence of the mysterious phenomena, for three weeks. The inhabitants retired to the garrison, and putthemselves in a state of defence against the diabolical besiegers. Sixty men were despatched from Ipswich, in military array, tore-enforce the garrison, and several valiant sallies were made fromits walls. Much powder was expended, but no corporeal or incorporealblood was shed. An account of these events was drawn up by the Rev. John Emerson, then the minister of the first parish in Gloucester, from which the facts now mentioned have been selected. It is veryminute and particular. The appearance and dress of the supernaturalenemies are described. They wore white waistcoats, blue shirts, andwhite breeches, and had bushy heads of black hair. Mr. Emersonconcludes his account by expressing the hope that "all rationalpersons will be satisfied that Gloucester was not alarmed last summerfor above a fortnight together by real French and Indians, but thatthe Devil and his agents were the cause of all the molestation whichat this time befell the town. "

These wonderful things took place at Cape Ann, about the time that thegreat conflict between the Devil and his confederates on the one hand, and the ministers and magistrates on the other, at Salem Village, wasreaching its height. It is said that it was regarded by the mostconsiderate persons, at the time, as an artful contrivance of theDevil to create a diversion of the attention of the pious colonistsfrom his operations through the witches in Salem, and, by dividing anddistracting their forces, to obtain an advantage over them in the warhe was waging against their churches and their religion. 

 * * * * *

We are now ready to enter upon the story of Salem witchcraft. We haveendeavored to become acquainted with the people who acted conspicuousparts in the drama, and to understand their character; and have triedto collect, and bring into appreciating view, the opinions andtheories, the habits of thought, the associations of mind, thepassions, impulses, and fantasies that guided, moulded, and controlledtheir conduct. The law, literature, and theology of the age, as theybore on the subject, have been brought before us. The last greatdisplay of the effects of the doctrines of demonology, of the beliefof the agency of invisible, irresponsible beings, whether fallenangels or departed spirits, upon the actions of men and human affairs, is now to open before us. The final results of superstitions andfables and fancies, accumulating through the ages, are to be exhibitedin a transaction, an actual demonstration in real life. They are topresent an exemplification that will at once fully display theirpower, and deal their death-blow. 

Without the least purpose or wish to cover up or extenuate thefollies, excesses, or outrages I am about to describe, into which thecommunity suffered itself to be led in the witchcraft proceedings of1692, --with a desire, on the contrary, to make the lesson then givenof the mischief resulting from misguided enthusiasm, and which willalways result when popular excitement is allowed to wield theorganized powers of society, as impressive as facts and truth willjustify, --I feel bound to say, in advance, that there are someconsiderations which we must keep before us, while reviewing theincidents of the transaction. The theological, legal, andphilosophical doctrines and the popular beliefs, on which it wasfounded, have, as I have shown, led, in other countries and periods, to similar, and often vastly more shameful, cruel, and destructiveresults. But there was something in the affair, as it was developedhere, that has arrested the notice of mankind, and clothed it with aninherent interest, beyond all other events of the kind that haveelsewhere or ever occurred. 

The moral force engendered in the civilization planted on theseshores, and pervading the whole body of society, supplied a mightiermomentum, as it does to this day, and ever will, to the movement ofthe people, acting in a mass and as a unit, than can anywhere else befound. A population, invigorated by hardy enterprise, and the constantexercise of all the faculties of freedom, and actuated throughout byindividual energy of character, must be mightier in motion than anyother people. Such a population multiplies tenfold its physicalforces, by the addition of moral and intellectual energies. The menof the day and scene we are now to contemplate, however deluded, towhatever extremities carried, were controlled by fixed, absolute, sharply defined, and, in themselves, great ideas. They believed inGod. They also believed in the Devil. They bowed in an adoration thatpenetrated their inmost souls, before the one as a being of infiniteholiness: they regarded the other as a being of an all but infinitepower of evil. They feared and worshipped God. They hated and defiedthe Devil. They believed that Satan was waging war against Jehovah, and that the conflict was for the dominion of the world, for theestablishment or the overthrow of the Church of Christ. The battle, they fully believed, could have no other issue than the salvation orthe ruin of the souls of men. This was not, with them, a meretechnical, verbal creed. It was a deep-seated conviction, heldearnestly with a clear and distinct apprehension of its import, byevery individual mind. For this warfare, they put on the whole armorof faith, rallied to the banner of the Most High, and met Satan faceto face. In this one great idea, a stern, determined, unflinching, all-sacrificing people concentrated their strength. No wonder that theconflict reached a magnitude which made it observable to the wholecountry and all countries at the time, and will make it memorablethroughout all time. Those engaged in it, with this sentimentabsorbing their very souls, passed, for the time, out of the realm ofall other sentiments, and were insensible to all otherconsiderations. The nearer and dearer the relatives, the higher andmore conspicuous the persons, who, in their belief, were in leaguewith the Devil, the more profound the abhorrence of their crime, andthe determination to cut off and destroy them utterly. They believedthat Satan had, once before, "against the throne and monarchy of God, raised impious war and battle proud;" and that for this he had beencast out from "heaven, with all his host of rebel angels;" that he, with his army of subordinate wicked spirits, was making a desperateeffort to retrieve his lost estate, by a renewed rebellion againstGod; and they were determined to drive him, and all his confederates, for ever from the confines of the earth. The humble hamlet of SalemVillage was felt to be the great and final battle-ground. However wildand absurd this idea is now regarded, it was then sincerely andthoroughly entertained, and must be taken into the account, in comingto a just estimate of the character of the transaction, and of thoseengaged in it. 

One other thought is to be borne in mind, as we pass through thescenes that are to be spread before us. The theology of Christendom, at that time, so far as it relates to the power and agency of Satanand demonology in general, --and this is the only point of view onwhich I ever refer to theology in this discussion, --and the wholefabric of popular superstitions founded upon it, had reached theirculmination. The beginning, middle, and close of the seventeenthcentury, witnessed the greatest display of those superstitions, andprepared the way for their final explosion. As the hour of theirdissolution was at hand, and they were doomed to vanish before thelight of science and education, to pass from the realm of supposedreality into that of acknowledged fiction, it seems to have beenordered that they should leave monuments behind them, from which theircharacter, elements, and features, and their terrible influence, mightbe read and studied in all subsequent ages. 

The ideas in reference to the agency and designs of the great enemy ofGod and man, and all his subordinate hosts, witches, fairies, ghosts, "gorgons and hydras, and chimeras dire, " "apparitions, signs, andprodigies, " by which the minds of men had so long been filled, andtheir fearful imaginations exercised, as they took their flight, imprinted themselves, for perpetual remembrance, in productions which, more than any works of mere human genius, are sure to live for ever. They left their forms crystallized, with imperishable lineaments, inthe greatest of dramas and the greatest of epics. The plays ofShakespeare, as the century opened, and the verse of Milton in itscentral period, are their record and their picture. 

But there was another shape and aspect in which it was pre-eminentlyimportant to have their memory preserved; and that was theirapplication to life, their influence upon the conduct of men, theaction of tribunals, and the movements of society, and, in general, their effects, when allowed full operation, upon human happiness andwelfare. This want was supplied, as the century terminated, by thetragedy in real life, whose scenes are now to be presented inWITCHCRAFT AT SALEM VILLAGE. 

However strange it seems, it is quite worthy of observation, that theactors in that tragedy, the "afflicted children, " and other witnesses, in their various statements and operations, embraced about the wholecircle of popular superstition. How those young country girls, some ofthem mere children, most of them wholly illiterate, could have becomefamiliar with such fancies, to such an extent, is truly surprising. They acted out, and brought to bear with tremendous effect, almost allthat can be found in the literature of that day, and the periodpreceding it, relating to such subjects. Images and visions which hadbeen portrayed in tales of romance, and given interest to the pages ofpoetry, will be made by them, as we shall see, to throng the woods, flit through the air, and hover over the heads of a terrified court. The ghosts of murdered wives and children will play their parts with avividness of representation and artistic skill of expression that havehardly been surpassed in scenic representations on the stage. In theSalem-witchcraft proceedings, the superstition of the middle ages wasembodied in real action. All its extravagances, absurdities, andmonstrosities appear in their application to human experience. We seewhat the effect has been, and must be, when the affairs of life, incourts of law and the relations of society, or the conduct or feelingsof individuals, are suffered to be under the control of fanciful ormystical notions. When a whole people abandons the solid ground ofcommon sense, overleaps the boundaries of human knowledge, givesitself up to wild reveries, and lets loose its passions withoutrestraint, it presents a spectacle more terrific to behold, andbecomes more destructive and disastrous, than any convulsion of merematerial nature; than tornado, conflagration, or earthquake. 

END OF VOL. I. 

AMERICAN CLASSICS

SALEM WITCHCRAFT

_With an Account of Salem Village and A History of Opinions onWitchcraft and Kindred Subjects_

CHARLES W. UPHAM

_Volume II_

FREDERICK UNGAR PUBLISHING CO. 

_New York_

_Fourth Printing, 1969__Printed in the United States of America_Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 59-10887

[Illustration: THE PHILIP ENGLISH HOUSE. --VOL. II. , 142. ]

[Illustration: Witch Hill. 1866. ]

PART THIRD. 

WITCHCRAFT AT SALEM VILLAGE. 

We left Mr. Parris in the early part of November, 1691, at the crisisof his controversy with the inhabitants of Salem Village, undercircumstances which seemed to indicate that its termination was nearat hand. The opposition to him had assumed a form which made it quiteprobable that it would succeed in dislodging him from his position. But the end was not yet. Events were ripening that were to give him anew and fearful strength, and open a scene in which he was to act apart destined to attract the notice of the world, and become apermanent portion of human history. The doctrines of demonology hadproduced their full effect upon the minds of men, and every thing wasready for a final display of their power. The story of the Goodwinchildren, as told by Cotton Mather, was known and read in all thedwellings of the land, and filled the imaginations of a credulous age. Deputy-governor Danforth had begun the work of arrests; and personscharged with witchcraft, belonging to neighboring towns, were alreadyin prison. 

Mr. Parris appears to have had in his family several slaves, probablybrought by him from the West Indies. One of them, whom he calls, inhis church-record book, "my negro lad, " had died, a year or twobefore, at the age of nineteen. Two of them were man and wife. Theformer was always known by the name of "John Indian;" the latter wascalled "Tituba. " These two persons may have originated the "Salemwitchcraft. " They are spoken of as having come from New Spain, as itwas then called, --that is, the Spanish West Indies, and the adjacentmainlands of Central and South America, --and, in all probability, contributed, from the wild and strange superstitions prevalent amongtheir native tribes, materials which, added to the commonly receivednotions on such subjects, heightened the infatuation of the times, andinflamed still more the imaginations of the credulous. Personsconversant with the Indians of Mexico, and on both sides of theIsthmus, discern many similarities in their systems of demonology withideas and practices developed here. 

Mr. Parris's former residence in the neighborhood of the Spanish Main, and the prominent part taken by his Indian slaves in originating theproceedings at the village, may account for some of the features ofthe transaction. 

During the winter of 1691 and 1692, a circle of young girls had beenformed, who were in the habit of meeting at Mr. Parris's house for thepurpose of practising palmistry, and other arts of fortune-telling, and of becoming experts in the wonders of necromancy, magic, andspiritualism. It consisted, besides the Indian servants, mainly of thefollowing persons:--

Elizabeth, daughter of Mr. Parris, was nine years of age. She seems tohave performed a leading part in the first stages of the affair, andmust have been a child of remarkable precocity. It is a noticeablefact, that her father early removed her from the scene. She was sentto the town, where she remained in the family of Stephen Sewall, untilthe proceedings at the village were brought to a close. AbigailWilliams, a niece of Mr. Parris, and a member of his household, waseleven years of age. She acted conspicuously in the witchcraftprosecutions from beginning to end. Ann Putnam, daughter of SergeantThomas Putnam, the parish clerk or recorder, was twelve years of age. The character and social position of her parents gave her a prominencewhich an extraordinary development of the imaginative faculty, and ofmental powers generally, enabled her to hold throughout. This younggirl is perhaps entitled to be regarded as, in many respects, theleading agent in all the mischief that followed. Mary Walcot wasseventeen years of age. Her father was Jonathan Walcot (vol. I. P. 225). His first wife, Mary Sibley, to whom he was married in 1664, haddied in 1683. She was the mother of Mary. It is a singular fact, andindicates the estimation in which Captain Walcot was held, that, although not a church-member, he filled the office of deacon of theparish for several years before the formation of the church. MercyLewis was also seventeen years of age. When quite young, she was, fora time, in the family of the Rev. George Burroughs: and, in 1692, wasliving as a servant in the family of Thomas Putnam; although, occasionally, she seems to have lived, in the same capacity, with thatof John Putnam, Jr. , the constable of the village. He was a son ofNathaniel, and resided in the neighborhood of Thomas and Deacon EdwardPutnam. Mercy Lewis performed a leading part in the proceedings, hadgreat energy of purpose and capacity of management, and becameresponsible for much of the crime and horror connected with them. Elizabeth Hubbard, seventeen years of age, who also occupies a bademinence in the scene, was a niece of Mrs. Dr. Griggs, and lived inher family. Elizabeth Booth and Susannah Sheldon, each eighteen yearsof age, belonged to families in the neighborhood. Mary Warren, twentyyears of age, was a servant in the family of John Procter; and SarahChurchill, of the same age, was a servant in that of George Jacobs, Sr. These two last were actuated, it is too apparent, by maliciousfeelings towards the families in which they resided, and contributedlargely to the horrible tragedy. The facts to be exhibited will enableevery one who carefully considers them, to form an estimate, forhimself, of the respective character and conduct of these youngpersons. It is almost beyond belief that they were wholly actuated bydeliberate and cold-blooded malignity. Their crime would, in thatview, have been without a parallel in monstrosity of wickedness, andbeyond what can be imagined of the guiltiest and most depravednatures. For myself, I am unable to determine how much may beattributed to credulity, hallucination, and the delirium ofexcitement, or to deliberate malice and falsehood. There is too muchevidence of guile and conspiracy to attribute all their actions anddeclarations to delusion; and their conduct throughout was stampedwith a bold assurance and audacious bearing. With one or two slightand momentary exceptions, there was a total absence of compunction orcommiseration, and a reckless disregard of the agonies and destructionthey were scattering around them. They present a subject that justlyclaims, and will for ever task, the examination of those who are mostcompetent to fathom the mysteries of the human soul, sound its depths, and measure the extent to which it is liable to become wicked anddevilish. It will be seen that other persons were drawn to act withthese "afflicted children, " as they were called, some from contagiousdelusion, and some, as was quite well proved, from a false, mischievous, and malignant spirit. 

Besides the above-mentioned persons, there were three married women, rather under middle life, who acted with the afflicted children, --Mrs. Ann Putnam, the mother of the child of that name; Mrs. Pope; and awoman, named Bibber, who appears to have lived at Wenham. Anothermarried woman, --spoken of as "ancient, "--named Goodell, had also beenin the habit of attending their meetings; but she is not named in anyof the documents on file, and was probably withdrawn, at an earlyperiod, from participating in the transaction. 

In the course of the winter, they became quite skilful and expert inthe arts they were learning, and gradually began to display theirattainments to the admiration and amazement of beholders. At first, they made no charges against any person, but confined themselves tostrange actions, exclamations, and contortions. They would creep intoholes, and under benches and chairs, put themselves into odd andunnatural postures, make wild and antic gestures, and utter incoherentand unintelligible sounds. They would be seized with spasms, dropinsensible to the floor, or writhe in agony, suffering dreadfultortures, and uttering loud and piercing outcries. The attention ofthe families in which they held their meetings was called to theirextraordinary condition and proceedings; and the whole neighborhoodand surrounding country soon were filled with the story of the strangeand unaccountable sufferings of the "afflicted girls. " No explanationcould be given, and their condition became worse and worse. Thephysician of the village, Dr. Griggs, was called in, a consultationhad, and the opinion finally and gravely given, that the afflictedchildren were bewitched. It was quite common in those days for thefaculty to dispose of difficult cases by this resort. When theirremedies were baffled, and their skill at fault, the patient was saidto be "under an evil hand. " In all cases, the sage conclusion wasreceived by nurses, and elderly women called in on such occasions, ifthe symptoms were out of the common course, or did not yield to theprescriptions these persons were in the habit of applying. Very soon, the whole community became excited and alarmed to the highest degree. All other topics were forgotten. The only thing spoken or thought ofwas the terrible condition of the afflicted children in Mr. Parris'shouse, or wherever, from time to time, the girls assembled. They werethe objects of universal compassion and wonder. The people flockedfrom all quarters to witness their sufferings, and gaze with awe upontheir convulsions. Becoming objects of such notice, they werestimulated to vary and expand the manifestations of the extraordinaryinfluence that was upon them. They extended their operations beyondthe houses of Mr. Parris, and the families to which they belonged, topublic places; and their fits, exclamations, and outcries disturbedthe exercises of prayer meetings, and the ordinary services of thecongregation. On one occasion, on the Lord's Day, March 20th, when thesinging of the psalm previous to the sermon was concluded, before theperson preaching--Mr. Lawson--could come forward, Abigail Williamscried out, "Now stand up, and name your text. " When he had read it, ina loud and insolent voice she exclaimed, "It's a long text. " In themidst of the discourse, Mrs. Pope broke in, "Now, there is enough ofthat. " In the afternoon of the same day, while referring to thedoctrine he had been expounding in the preceding service, AbigailWilliams rudely ejaculated, "I know no doctrine you had. If you didname one, I have forgot it. " An aged member of the church was present, against whom a warrant on the charge of witchcraft had been procuredthe day before. Being apprised of the proceeding, Abigail Williamsspoke aloud, during the service, calling by name the person about tobe apprehended, "Look where she sits upon the beam, sucking heryellow-bird betwixt her fingers. " Ann Putnam, joining in, exclaimed, "There is a yellow-bird sitting on the minister's hat, as it hangs onthe pin in the pulpit. " Mr. Lawson remarks, with much simplicity, thatthese things, occurring "in the time of public worship, did somethinginterrupt me in my first prayer, being so unusual. " But he bracedhimself up to the emergency, and went on with the service. There is nointimation that Mr. Parris rebuked his niece for her disorderlybehavior. As at several other times, the people sitting near AnnPutnam had to lay hold of her to prevent her proceeding to greaterextremities, and wholly breaking up the meeting. The girls weresupposed to be under an irresistible and supernatural impulse; and, instead of being severely punished, were looked upon with mingledpity, terror, and awe, and made objects of the greatest attention. Ofcourse, where members of the minister's family were countenanced insuch proceedings, during the exercises of public worship, on theLord's Day, in the meeting-house, it was not strange that people ingeneral yielded to the excitement. But all did not. Several members ofthe family of Francis Nurse, Peter Cloyse and wife, and Joseph Putnam, expressed their disapprobation of such doings being allowed, andabsented themselves from meeting. Perhaps others took the same course;but whoever did were marked, as the sequel will show. 

In the mean while the excitement was worked up to the highest pitch. The families to which several of the "afflicted children" belongedwere led to apply themselves to fasting and prayer, on which occasionsthe neighbors, under the guidance of the minister, would assemble, andunite in invocations to the Divine Being to interpose and deliver themfrom the snares and dominion of Satan. The "afflicted children" whomight be present would not, as a general thing, interrupt the prayerswhile in progress, but would break out with their wild outcries andconvulsive spasms in the intervals of the service. In due time, Mr. Parris sent for the neighboring ministers to assemble at his house, and unite with him in devoting a day to solemn religious services andearnest supplications to the throne of Mercy for rescue from the powerof the great enemy of souls. The ministers spent the day in Mr. Parris's house, and the children performed their feats before theireyes. The reverend gentlemen were astounded at what they saw, fullycorroborated the opinion of Dr. Griggs, and formally declared theirbelief that the Evil One had commenced his operations with a bolderfront and on a broader scale than ever before in this or any othercountry. 

This judgment of the ministers was quickly made known everywhere; and, if doubt remained in any mind, it was suppressed by the irresistiblepower of an overwhelming public conviction. Individuals were lost inthe universal fanaticism. Society was dissolved into a wild andexcited crowd. Men and women left their fields, their houses, theirlabors and employments, to witness the awful unveiling of the demoniacpower, and to behold the workings of Satan himself upon the victims ofhis wrath. 

It must be borne in mind, that it was then an established doctrine intheology, philosophy, and law, that the Devil could not operate uponmortals, or mortal affairs, except through the intermediateinstrumentality of human beings in confederacy with him, that is, witches or wizards. The question, of course, in all minds and on alltongues, was, "Who are the agents of the Devil in afflicting thesegirls? There must be some among us thus acting, and who are they?" Forsome time the girls held back from mentioning names; or, if they did, it was prevented from being divulged to the public. In the mean time, the excitement spread and deepened. At length the people had become sothoroughly prepared for the work, that it was concluded to beginoperations in earnest. The continued pressure upon the "afflictedchildren, " the earnest and importunate inquiry, on all sides, "Who isit that bewitches you?" opened their lips in response, and they beganto select and bring forward their victims. One after another, theycried out "Good, " "Osburn, " "Tituba. " On the 29th of February, 1692, warrants were duly issued against those persons. It is observable, that the complainants who procured the warrants in these cases wereJoseph Hutchinson, Edward Putnam, Thomas Putnam, and Thomas Preston. This fact shows how nearly unanimous, at this time, was the convictionthat the sufferings of the girls were the result of witchcraft. JosephHutchinson was a firm-minded man, of strong common sense, and from hisgeneral character and ways of thinking and acting, one of the lastpersons liable to be carried away by a popular enthusiasm, and wasfound among the earliest rescued from it. Thomas Preston was ason-in-law of Francis Nurse. 

As all was ripe for the development of the plot, extraordinary meanswere taken to give publicity, notoriety, and effect to the firstexaminations. On the 1st of March the two leading magistrates of theneighborhood, men of great note and influence, whose fathers had beenamong the chief founders of the settlement, and who wereAssistants, --that is, members of the highest legislative and judicialbody in the colony, combining with the functions of a senate those ofa court of last resort with most comprehensive jurisdiction, --JohnHathorne and Jonathan Corwin, entered the village, in imposing array, escorted by the marshal, constables, and their aids, with all thetrappings of their offices; reined up at Nathaniel Ingersoll'scorner, and dismounted at his door. The whole population of theneighborhood, apprised of the occasion, was gathered on the lawn, orcame flocking along the roads. The crowd was so great that it wasnecessary to adjourn to the meeting-house, which was filled at once bya multitude excited to the highest pitch of indignation and abhorrencetowards the prisoners, and of curiosity to witness the novel andimposing spectacle and proceedings. The magistrates took seats infront of the pulpit, facing the assembly; a long table or raisedplatform being placed before them; and it was announced, that theywere ready to enter upon the examination. On bringing in anddelivering over the accused parties, the officers who had executed thewarrants stated that they "had made diligent search for images andsuch like, but could find none. " After prayer, Constable George Lockerproduced the body of Sarah Good; and Constable Joseph Herrick, thebodies of Sarah Osburn, and Tituba Mr. Parris's Indian woman. Theevidence seems to indicate, that, on these occasions, the prisonerswere placed on the platform, to keep them from the contact of thegeneral crowd, and that all might see them. 

Sarah Good was first examined, the other two being removed from thehouse for the time. In complaining of her, and bringing her forwardfirst, the prosecutors showed that they were well advised. There was ageneral readiness to receive the charge against her, as she wasevidently the object of much prejudice in the neighborhood. Herhusband, who was a weak, ignorant, and dependent person, had becomealienated from her. The family were very poor; and she and herchildren had sometimes been without a house to shelter them, and leftto wander from door to door for relief. Whether justly or not, sheappears to have been subject to general obloquy. Probably there was noone in the country around, against whom popular suspicion could havebeen more readily directed, or in whose favor and defence lessinterest could be awakened. She was a forlorn, friendless, andforsaken creature, broken down by wretchedness of condition andill-repute. The following are the minutes of her examination, as foundamong the files:--

 "_The Examination of Sarah Good before the Worshipful Esqrs. John Hathorne and Jonathan Corwin. _

 "Sarah Good, what evil spirit have you familiarity with?--None. 

 "Have you made no contracts with the Devil?--No. 

 "Why do you hurt these children?--I do not hurt them. I scorn it. 

 "Who do you employ then to do it?--I employ nobody. 

 "What creature do you employ then?--No creature: but I am falsely accused. 

 "Why did you go away muttering from Mr. Parris his house?--I did not mutter, but I thanked him for what he gave my child. 

 "Have you made no contract with the Devil?--No. 

 "Hathorne desired the children all of them to look upon her, and see if this were the person that hurt them; and so they all did look upon her, and said this was one of the persons that did torment them. Presently they were all tormented. 

 "Sarah Good, do you not see now what you have done? Why do you not tell us the truth? Why do you thus torment these poor children?--I do not torment them. 

 "Who do you employ then?--I employ nobody. I scorn it. 

 "How came they thus tormented?--What do I know? You bring others here, and now you charge me with it. 

 "Why, who was it?--I do not know but it was some you brought into the meeting-house with you. 

 "We brought you into the meeting-house. --But you brought in two more. 

 "Who was it, then, that tormented the children?--It was Osburn. 

 "What is it you say when you go muttering away from persons' houses?--If I must tell, I will tell. 

 "Do tell us then. --If I must tell, I will tell: it is the Commandments. I may say my Commandments, I hope. 

 "What Commandment is it?--If I must tell you, I will tell: it is a psalm. 

 "What psalm?

 "(After a long time she muttered over some part of a psalm. )

 "Who do you serve?--I serve God. 

 "What God do you serve?--The God that made heaven and earth (though she was not willing to mention the word 'God'). Her answers were in a very wicked, spiteful manner, reflecting and retorting against the authority with base and abusive words; and many lies she was taken in. It was here said that her husband had said that he was afraid that she either was a witch or would be one very quickly. The worshipful Mr. Hathorne, asked him his reason why he said so of her, whether he had ever seen any thing by her. He answered 'No, not in this nature; but it was her bad carriage to him: and indeed, ' said he, 'I may say with tears, that she is an enemy to all good. '"

The foregoing is in the handwriting of Ezekiel Cheever. The followingis in that of John Hathorne:--

 "Salem Village, March the 1st, 1692. --Sarah Good, upon examination, denied the matter of fact (viz. ) that she ever used any witchcraft, or hurt the abovesaid children, or any of them. 

 "The abovenamed children, being all present, positively accused her of hurting of them sundry times within this two months, and also that morning. Sarah Good denied that she had been at their houses in said time or near them, or had done them any hurt. All the abovesaid children then present accused her face to face; upon which they were all dreadfully tortured and tormented for a short space of time; and, the affliction and tortures being over, they charged said Sarah Good again that she had then so tortured them, and came to them and did it, although she was personally then kept at a considerable distance from them. 

 "Sarah Good being asked if that she did not then hurt them, who did it; and the children being again tortured, she looked upon them, and said that it was one of them we brought into the house with us. We asked her who it was: she then answered, and said it was Sarah Osburn, and Sarah Osburn was then under custody, and not in the house; and the children, being quickly after recovered out of their fit, said that it was Sarah Good and also Sarah Osburn that then did hurt and torment or afflict them, although both of them at the same time at a distance or remote from them personally. There were also sundry other questions put to her, and answers given thereunto by her according as is also given in. "

It will be noticed that the examination was conducted in the form ofquestions put by the magistrate, Hathorne, based upon a foregoneconclusion of the prisoner's guilt, and expressive of a conviction, all along on his part, that the evidence of "the afflicted" againsther amounted to, and was, absolute demonstration. It will also benoticed, that, severe as was the opinion of her husband in referenceto her general conduct, he could not be made to say that he had evernoticed any thing in her of the nature of witchcraft. The torments thegirls affected to experience in looking at her must have produced anoverwhelming effect on the crowd, as they did on the magistrate, andeven on the poor, amazed creature herself. She did not seem to doubtthe reality of their sufferings. In this, and in all cases, it must beremembered that the account of the examination comes to us from thosewho were under the wildest excitement against the prisoners; that nocounsel was allowed them; that, if any thing was suffered to be saidin their defence by others, it has failed to reach us; that theaccused persons were wholly unaccustomed to such scenes and exposures, unsuspicious of the perils of a cross-examination, or of aninquisition conducted with a design to entrap and ensnare; and thatwhat they did say was liable to be misunderstood, as well asmisrepresented. We cannot hear their story. All we know is fromparties prejudiced, to the highest degree, against them. Sarah Goodwas an unfortunate and miserable woman in her circumstances andcondition: but, from all that appears on the record, making dueallowance for the credulity, extravagance, prejudice, folly, ormalignity of the witnesses; giving full effect to every thing that canclaim the character of substantial force alleged against her, it isundeniable, that there was not, beyond the afflicted girls, a particleof evidence to sustain the charge on which she was arraigned; andthat, in the worst aspect of her case, she was an object forcompassion, rather than punishment. Altogether, the proceedingsagainst her, which terminated with her execution, were cruel andshameful to the highest degree. 

On the conclusion of her examination, she was removed from themeeting-house, and Sarah Osburn brought in. Her selection, as one ofthe persons to be first cried out upon, was judicious. The public mindwas prepared to believe the charge against her. Her original name wasSarah Warren. She was married, April 5, 1662, to Robert Prince, whobelonged to a leading family, and owned a valuable farm. He diedearly, leaving her with two young children, James and Joseph. 

In the early colonial period, it was the custom for persons whodesired to come from the old country to America, but had not the meansto defray the expenses of the passage, to let or sell themselves, fora greater or less length of time, to individuals residing here whoneeded their service. The practice continued down to the presentcentury. Emigrants who thus sold themselves for a period of years werecalled "redemptioners. " Alexander Osburn came over from Ireland inthis character. The widow of Robert Prince bought out the residue ofhis time from the person to whom he was thus under contract, forfifteen pounds, and employed him to carry on her farm. After a while, she married him. This, it is probable, gave rise to some criticism;and, as her boys grew up, became more and more disagreeable to them. The marriage, as was natural, led to unhappy results. In 1720, afterOsburn had been dead some years, a curious case was brought intocourt, in which the sons of Robert Prince testified that Osburntreated their mother and them with great cruelty and barbarity. Theyhad become of age before their mother's death, and had signed theirnames to a deed conveying away land belonging to their patrimony. Theobject of the suit was to invalidate the conveyance by proving thatthey were compelled by Osburn to sign the deed, he using threats andviolence upon them at the time. There was an extraordinary conflict oftestimony in the trial; some witnesses strongly corroborating theaccusations of the Princes, and some equally strong in vindication ofthe character of Osburn. It was shown, that, in the opinion of severalof his neighbors, he was an industrious, respectable, and worthyperson. It is difficult to determine the precise merits of the case. After the death of his wife, Osburn married Ruth, a daughter ofWilliam Cantlebury, and widow of William Sibley. She was a woman ofunquestioned excellence of character, and of a large landed estate. Osburn was her third husband, the first having been Thomas Small. After her marriage to Osburn, he and she joined the church, and werereputable persons in all respects. He was well regarded as a citizen, and often on the parish committee. Neither he nor the widow Sibleyappear to have been implicated in the witchcraft proceedings in anyother particular than that he testified that his then wife Sarah hadnot been for some time at meeting. There is no indication that thiswas volunteer testimony. He and his wife Ruth were among the firmestopponents of Mr. Parris. There is no mention of his having hadchildren by either of his American wives. His son John, who probablycame with him to the country, was an inhabitant of the Village; andhis name is on the rate-list, for the last time, in 1718, his fatherhaving died some years before. The Osborne family, in this part of thecountry, does not appear to have sprung from this source. 

Without attempting to decide where, or in what proportions, the blameis to be laid, the fact is evident, that the marriage of the widowSarah Prince to Alexander Osburn was an unhappy one. Her mind becamedepressed, if not distracted. For some time, she had been bedridden. Of course, as she had occupied a respectable social position, and wasa woman of property, her case naturally gave rise to scandal. Rumorwas busy and gossip rife in reference to her; and it was quite naturalthat she should have been suggested for the accusing girls to pitchupon. The following is an account of her examination by themagistrates, in the handwriting of John Hathorne:--

 "Sarah Osburne, upon examination, denied the matter of fact, viz. , that she ever understood or used any witchcraft, or hurt any of the abovesaid children. 

 "The children above named, being all personally present, accused her face to face; which, being done, they were all hurt, afflicted, and tortured very much; which, being over, and they out of their fits, they said that said Sarah Osburne did then come to them, and hurt them, Sarah Osburne being then kept at a distance personally from them. Sarah Osburne was asked why she then hurt them. She denied it. It being asked of her how she could so pinch and hurt them, and yet she be at that distance personally from them, she answered she did not then hurt them, nor ever did. She was asked who, then, did it, or who she employed to do it. She answered she did not know that the Devil goes about in her likeness to do any hurt. Sarah Osburne, being told that Sarah Good, one of her companions, had, upon examination, accused her, she, notwithstanding, denied the same, according to her examination, which is more at large given in, as therein will appear. "

The following is in the handwriting of Ezekiel Cheever:--

 "_Sarah Osburn her Examination. _

 "What evil spirit have you familiarity with?--None. 

 "Have you made no contract with the Devil?--No: I never saw the Devil in my life. 

 "Why do you hurt these children?--I do not hurt them. 

 "Who do you employ, then, to hurt them?--I employ nobody. 

 "What familiarity have you with Sarah Good?--None: I have not seen her these two years. 

 "Where did you see her then?--One day, agoing to town. 

 "What communications had you with her?--I had none, only 'How do you do?' or so. I do not know her by name. 

 "What did you call her, then?

 "(Osburn made a stand at that; at last, said she called her Sarah. )

 "Sarah Good saith that it was you that hurt the children. --I do not know that the Devil goes about in my likeness to do any hurt. 

 "Mr. Hathorne desired all the children to stand up, and look upon her, and see if they did know her, which they all did; and every one of them said that this was one of the women that did afflict them, and that they had constantly seen her in the very habit that she was now in. Three evidences declared that she said this morning, that she was more like to be bewitched than that she was a witch. Mr. Hathorne asked her what made her say so. She answered that she was frighted one time in her sleep, and either saw, or dreamed that she saw, a thing like an Indian all black, which did pinch her in her neck, and pulled her by the back part of her head to the door of the house. 

 "Did you never see any thing else?--No. 

 "(It was said by some in the meeting-house, that she had said that she would never believe that lying spirit any more. )

 "What lying spirit is this? Hath the Devil ever deceived you, and been false to you?--I do not know the Devil. I never did see him. 

 "What lying spirit was it, then?--It was a voice that I thought I heard. 

 "What did it propound to you?--That I should go no more to meeting; but I said I would, and did go the next sabbath-day. 

 "Were you never tempted further?--No. 

 "Why did you yield thus far to the Devil as never to go to meeting since?--Alas! I have been sick, and not able to go. 

 "Her husband and others said that she had not been at meeting three years and two months. "

The foregoing illustrates the unfairness practised by the examiningmagistrate. He took for granted, as we shall find to have been thecase in all instances, the guilt of the prisoner, and endeavored toentangle her by leading questions, thus involving her incontradiction. By the force of his own assumptions, he had compelledSarah Good to admit the reality of the sufferings of the girls, andthat they must be caused by some one. The amount of what she had saidwas, that, if caused by one or the other of them, "then it must beOsburn, " for she was sure of her own innocence. This expression, towhich she was driven in self-exculpation, was perverted by thereporter, Ezekiel Cheever, and by the magistrate, into an indirectconfession and a direct accusation of Osburn. In the absence of Good, the magistrate told Osburn that Good had confessed and accused her. This was a misrepresentation of one, and a false and fraudulent trickupon the other. Considering the feeble condition of Sarah Osburngenerally, the snares by which she was beset, the distressing andbewildering circumstances in which she was placed, and the infirmstate of her reason, as evidenced in her statement of what she saw, ordreamed that she saw and heard, --not having a clear idea which, --heranswers, as reported by the prosecutors, show that her broken anddisordered mind was essentially truthful and innocent. 

Sarah Osburn was removed from the meeting-house, and Tituba brought inand examined, as follows:--

 "Tituba, what evil spirit have you familiarity with?--None. 

 "Why do you hurt these children?--I do not hurt them. 

 "Who is it then?--The Devil, for aught I know. 

 "Did you never see the Devil?--The Devil came to me, and bid me serve him. 

 "Who have you seen?--Four women sometimes hurt the children. 

 "Who were they?--Goody Osburn and Sarah Good, and I do not know who the others were. Sarah Good and Osburn would have me hurt the children, but I would not. 

 "(She further saith there was a tall man of Boston that she did see. )

 "When did you see them?--Last night, at Boston. 

 "What did they say to you?--They said, 'Hurt the children. '

 "And did you hurt them?--No: there is four women and one man, they hurt the children, and then they lay all upon me; and they tell me, if I will not hurt the children, they will hurt me. 

 "But did you not hurt them?--Yes; but I will hurt them no more. 

 "Are you not sorry that you did hurt them?--Yes. 

 "And why, then, do you hurt them?--They say, 'Hurt children, or we will do worse to you. '

 "What have you seen?--A man come to me, and say, 'Serve me. '

 "What service?--Hurt the children: and last night there was an appearance that said, 'Kill the children;' and, if I would not go on hurting the children, they would do worse to me. 

 "What is this appearance you see?--Sometimes it is like a hog, and sometimes like a great dog. 

 "(This appearance she saith she did see four times. )

 "What did it say to you?--The black dog said, 'Serve me;' but I said, 'I am afraid. ' He said, if I did not, he would do worse to me. 

 "What did you say to it?--I will serve you no longer. Then he said he would hurt me; and then he looks like a man, and threatens to hurt me. (She said that this man had a yellow-bird that kept with him. ) And he told me he had more pretty things that he would give me, if I would serve him. 

 "What were these pretty things?--He did not show me them. 

 "What else have you seen?--Two cats; a red cat, and a black cat. 

 "What did they say to you?--They said, 'Serve me. '

 "When did you see them?--Last night; and they said, 'Serve me;' but I said I would not. 

 "What service?--She said, hurt the children. 

 "Did you not pinch Elizabeth Hubbard this morning?--The man brought her to me, and made pinch her. 

 "Why did you go to Thomas Putnam's last night, and hurt his child?--They pull and haul me, and make go. 

 "And what would they have you do?--Kill her with a knife. 

 "(Lieutenant Fuller and others said at this time, when the child saw these persons, and was tormented by them, that she did complain of a knife, --that they would have her cut her head off with a knife. )

 "How did you go?--We ride upon sticks, and are there presently. 

 "Do you go through the trees or over them?--We see nothing, but are there presently. 

 "Why did you not tell your master?--I was afraid: they said they would cut off my head if I told. 

 "Would you not have hurt others, if you could?--They said they would hurt others, but they could not. 

 "What attendants hath Sarah Good?--A yellow-bird, and she would have given me one. 

 "What meat did she give it?--It did suck her between her fingers. 

 "Did you not hurt Mr. Curren's child?--Goody Good and Goody Osburn told that they did hurt Mr. Curren's child, and would have had me hurt him too; but I did not. 

 "What hath Sarah Osburn?--Yesterday she had a thing with a head like a woman, with two legs and wings. 

 "(Abigail Williams, that lives with her uncle Mr. Parris, said that she did see the same creature, and it turned into the shape of Goodie Osburn. )

 "What else have you seen with Osburn?--Another thing, hairy: it goes upright like a man, it hath only two legs. 

 "Did you not see Sarah Good upon Elizabeth Hubbard, last Saturday?--I did see her set a wolf upon her to afflict her. 

 "(The persons with this maid did say that she did complain of a wolf. She further said that she saw a cat with Good at another time. )

 "What clothes doth the man go in?--He goes in black clothes; a tall man, with white hair, I think. 

 "How doth the woman go?--In a white hood, and a black hood with a top-knot. 

 "Do you see who it is that torments these children now?--Yes: it is Goody Good; she hurts them in her own shape. 

 "Who is it that hurts them now?--I am blind now: I cannot see. 

 "Written by EZEKIEL CHEEVER. 

 "SALEM VILLAGE, March the 1st, 1692. "

Another report of Tituba's examination has been preserved, and may befound in the second volume of the collection edited by Samuel G. Drake, entitled the "Witchcraft Delusion in New England. " It is in thehandwriting of Jonathan Corwin, very full and minute, and shows thatthe Indian woman was familiar with all the ridiculous and monstrousfancies then prevalent. The details of her statement cover nearly thewhole ground of them. While indicating, in most respects, a mind atthe lowest level of general intelligence, they give evidence ofcunning and wariness in the highest degree. This document is alsovaluable, as it affords information about particulars, incidentallymentioned and thus rescued from oblivion, which serve to bring backthe life of the past. Tituba describes the dresses of some of thewitches: "A black silk hood, with a white silk hood under it, withtop-knots. " One of them wore "a serge coat, with a white cap. " TheDevil appeared "in black clothes sometimes, sometimes serge coat ofother color. " She speaks of the "lean-to chamber" in the parsonage, and describes an aërial night ride "up" to Thomas Putnam's. "How didyou go? What did you ride upon?" asked the wondering magistrate. "Iride upon a stick, or pole, and Good and Osburn behind me: we ridetaking hold of one another; don't know how we go, for I saw no treesnor path, but was presently there when we were up. " In both reports, Tituba describes, quite graphically, the likenesses in which the Devilappeared to his confederates; but Corwin gives the details more fullythan Cheever. What the latter reports of the appearances in which theDevil accompanied Osburn, the former amplifies. "The thing with twolegs and wings, and a face like a woman, " "turns" into a full woman. The "hairy thing" becomes "a thing all over hairy, all the face hairy, and a long nose, and I don't know how to tell how the face looks; isabout two or three feet high, and goeth upright like a man; and, lastnight, it stood before the fire in Mr. Parris's hall. "

It is quite evident that the part played by the Indian woman on thisoccasion was pre-arranged. She had, from the first, been concernedwith the circle of girls in their necromantic operations; and herstatements show the materials out of which their ridiculous andmonstrous stories were constructed. She said that there were four who"hurt the children. " Upon being pressed by the magistrate to tell whothey were, she named Osburn and Good, but did "not know who the otherswere. " Two others were marked; but it was not thought best to bringthem out until these three examinations had first been made to tellupon the public mind. Tituba had been apprised of Elizabeth Hubbard'sstory, that she had been "pinched" that morning; and, as well as"Lieutenant Fuller and others, " had heard of the delirious exclamationof Thomas Putnam's sick child during the night. "Abigail Williams, that lives with her uncle Parris, " had communicated to the Indianslave the story of "the woman with two legs and wings. " In fact, shehad been fully admitted to their councils, and made acquainted withall the stories they were to tell. But, when it became necessary toavoid specifications touching parties whose names it had been decidednot to divulge at that stage of the business, the wily old servantescapes further interrogation, "I am blind now: I cannot see. "

Proceedings connected with these examinations were continued severaldays. The result appears, in the handwriting of John Hathorne, asfollows:--

 "Salem Village, March 1, 1691/2. --Tituba, an Indian woman, brought before us by Constable Jos. Herrick, of Salem, upon suspicion of witchcraft by her committed, according to the complaint of Jos. Hutchinson and Thomas Putnam, &c. , of Salem Village, as appears per warrant granted, Salem, 29th February, 1691/2. Tituba, upon examination, and after some denial, acknowledged the matter of fact, as, according to her examination given in, more fully will appear, and who also charged Sarah Good and Sarah Osburn with the same. 

 "Salem Village, March the 1st, 1691/2. --Sarah Good, Sarah Osburn, and Tituba, an Indian woman, all of Salem Village, being this day brought before us, upon suspicion of witchcraft, &c. , by them and every one of them committed; Tituba, an Indian woman, acknowledging the matter of fact, and Sarah Osburn and Sarah Good denying the same before us; but there appearing, in all their examinations, sufficient ground to secure them all. And, in order to further examination, they were all _per mittimus_ sent to the jails in the county of Essex. 

 "Salem, March 2. --Sarah Osburn again examined, and also Tituba, as will appear in their examinations given in. Tituba again acknowledged the fact, and also accused the other two. 

 "Salem, March 3. --Sarah Osburn, and Tituba, Indian, again examined. The examination now given in. Tituba again said the same. 

 "Salem, March 5. --Sarah Good and Tituba again examined; and, in their examination, Tituba acknowledged the same she did formerly, and accused the other two above said. 

 [Illustration: [signatures]]

 "Salem, March the 7th, 1691/2. --Sarah Good, Sarah Osburn, and Tituba, an Indian woman, all sent to the jail in Boston, according to their _mittimuses_, then sent to their Majesties' jail-keeper. "

It will be noticed that the magistrates did not venture to put intothis their final record, what they had unfairly tried to make SarahOsborn believe, that Sarah Good had been a witness against her. Thejail at Ipswich was at a distance of at least ten miles from thevillage meeting-house, by any road that could then have beentravelled. The transference of the prisoners day after day must havebeen very fatiguing to a sick woman like Sarah Osburn. Sarah Goodseems to have been able to bear it. Samuel Braybrook, an assistantconstable, having charge of her, says, that, on the way to Ipswich, she "leaped off her horse three times;" that she "railed against themagistrates, and endeavored to kill herself. " He further testified, that, at the very time she was performing these feats, Thomas Putnam'sdaughter, "at her father's house, declared the same. " As Braybrook wasmany miles from Thomas Putnam's house, at the moment when hiswonderful daughter exercised this miraculous extent of vision, itwould have been more satisfactory to have had some other testimony tothe fact. I mention this to show of what stuff the evidence in thesecases was made, and the credulity with which every thing wasswallowed. The prisoners were put to examination each day. 

Osburn and Good steadily maintained their innocence. Tituba all alongdeclared herself guilty, and accused the other two of having beenwith her in confederacy with the Devil. Mr. Parris made the followingdeposition, in relation to these examinations, to which hesubsequently swore in Court, at the trial of Sarah Good:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF SAM: PARRIS, aged about thirty and nine years. --Testifieth and saith, that Elizabeth Parris, Jr. , and Abigail Williams, and Ann Putnam, Jr. , and Elizabeth Hubbard, were most grievously and several times tortured during the examination of Sarah Good, Sarah Osburn, and Tituba, Indian, before the magistrates at Salem Village, 1 March, 1692. And the said Tituba being the last of the above said that was examined, they, the above said afflicted persons, were grievously distressed until the said Indian began to confess, and then they were immediately all quiet the rest of the said Indian woman's examination. Also Thomas Putnam, aged about forty years, and Ezekiel Cheever, aged about thirty and six years, testify to the whole of the above said; and all the three deponents aforesaid further testify, that, after the said Indian began to confess, she was herself very much afflicted, and in the face of authority at the same time, and openly charged the abovesaid Good and Osburn as the persons that afflicted her, the aforesaid Indian. "

By comparing these depositions with the other documents I havepresented, it will be seen how admirably the whole affair wasarranged, so far as concerned the part played by Tituba. She commencesher testimony by declaring her innocence. The afflicted children areinstantly thrown into torments, which, however, subside as soon asshe begins to confess. Immediately after commencing her confession, and as she proceeds in it, she herself becomes tormented "in the faceof authority, " before the eyes of the magistrates and the awestruckcrowd. Her power to afflict ceases as she breaks loose from hercompact with the Devil, who sends some unseen confederate, not thenbrought to light, to wreak his vengeance upon her for havingconfessed. Tituba, as well as the girls, showed herself an adept inthe arts taught in the circle. 

All we know of Sarah Osburn beyond this date are the following itemsin the Boston jailer's bill "against the country, " dated May 29, 1692:"To chains for Sarah Good and Sarah Osburn, 14 shillings:" "To thekeeping of Sarah Osburn, from the 7th of March to the 10th of May, when she died, being nine weeks and two days, £1. 3_s. _ 5_d. _"

The only further information we have of Tituba is from Calef, whosays, "The account she since gives of it is, that her master did beather, and otherwise abuse her, to make her confess and accuse (such ashe called) her sister-witches; and that whatsoever she said by way ofconfessing or accusing others was the effect of such usage: her masterrefused to pay her fees, unless she would stand to what she had said. Calef further states that she laid in jail until finally "sold for herfees. " The jailer's charge for her "diet in prison for a year and amonth" appears in a shape that corroborates Calef's statements, whichwere prepared for publication in 1697, and printed in London in 1700. Although zealously devoted to the work of exposing the enormitiesconnected with the witchcraft prosecutions, there is no ground todispute the veracity of Calef as to matters of fact. What he says ofthe declarations of Tituba, subsequent to her examination, is quiteconsistent with a critical analysis of the details of the record ofthat examination. It can hardly be doubted, whatever the amount ofseverity employed to make her act the part assigned her, that she wasused as an instrument to give effect to the delusion. 

Now let us consider the state of things that had been brought about inthe village, and in the surrounding country, at the close of the firstweek in March, 1692. The terrible sufferings of the girls in Mr. Parris's family and of their associates, for the two preceding months, had become known far and wide. A universal sympathy was awakened intheir behalf; and a sentiment of horror sunk deep into all hearts, atthe dread demonstration of the diabolical rage in their afflicted andtortured persons. A few, very few, distrusted; but the great majority, ninety-nine in a hundred of all the people, were completely swept intothe torrent. Nathaniel Putnam and Nathaniel Ingersoll were entirelydeluded, and continued so to the end. Even Joseph Hutchinson was, fora while, carried away. The physicians had all given their opinion thatthe girls were suffering from an "evil hand. " The neighboringministers, after a day's fasting and prayer, and a scrutinizinginspection of the condition of the afflicted children, had given it, as the result of their most solemn judgment, that it was a case ofwitchcraft. Persons from the neighboring towns had come to the place, and with their own eyes received demonstration of the same fact. Mr. Parris made it the topic of his public prayers and preaching. Thegirls, Sunday after Sunday, were under the malign influence, to thedisturbance and affrightment of the congregation. In all companies, inall families, all the day long, the sufferings and distractionoccurring in the houses of Mr. Parris, Thomas Putnam, and others, andin the meeting-house, were topics of excited conversation; and everyvoice was loud in demanding, every mind earnest to ascertain, who werethe persons, in confederacy with the Devil, thus torturing, pinching, convulsing, and bringing to the last extremities of mortal agony, these afflicted girls. Every one felt, that, if the guilty authors ofthe mischief could not be discovered, and put out of the way, no onewas safe for a moment. At length, when the girls cried out upon Good, Osburn, and Tituba, there was a general sense of satisfaction andrelief. It was thought that Satan's power might be checked. Theselection of the first victims was well made. They were just the kindof persons whom the public prejudice and credulity were prepared tosuspect and condemn. Their examination was looked for with the utmostinterest, and all flocked to witness the proceedings. 

In considering the state of mind of the people, as they crowded intoand around the old meeting-house, we can have no difficulty inrealizing the tremendous effects of what there occurred. It was feltthat then, on that spot, the most momentous crisis in the world'shistory had come. A crime, in comparison with which all other crimessink out of notice, was being notoriously and defiantly committed intheir midst. The great enemy of God and man was let loose among them. What had filled the hearts of mankind for ages, the world over, withdread apprehension, was come to pass; and in that village the greatbattle, on whose issue the preservation of the kingdom of the Lord onthe earth was suspended, had begun. Indeed, no language, no imagery, no conception of ours, can adequately express the feeling of awful andterrible solemnity with which all were overwhelmed. No body of menever convened in a more highly wrought state of excitement thanpervaded that assembly, when the magistrates entered, in all theirstern authority, and the scene opened on the 1st of March, 1692. Aminister, probably Mr. Parris, began, according to the custom of thetimes, with prayer. From what we know of his skill and talent inmeeting such occasions, it may well be supposed that his language andmanner heightened still more the passions of the hour. The marshal, oftall and imposing stature and aspect, accompanied by his constables, brought in the prisoners. Sarah Good, a poverty-stricken, wandering, and wretched victim of ill-fortune and ill-usage, was put to the bar. Every effort was made by the examining magistrate, aided by theofficious interference of the marshal, or other deluded orevil-disposed persons, --who, like him, were permitted to interposewith charges or abusive expressions, --to overawe and confound, involvein contradictions, and mislead the poor creature, and force her toconfess herself guilty and accuse others. In due time, the "afflictedchildren" were brought in; and a scene ensued, such as no person inthat crowd or in that generation had ever witnessed before. Immediately on being confronted with the prisoner, and meeting hereye, they fell, as if struck dead, to the floor; or screeched inagony; or went into fearful spasms or convulsive fits; or cried outthat they were pricked with pins, pinched, or throttled by invisiblehands. They were severally brought up to the prisoner, and, upontouching her person, instantly became calm, quiet, and fully restoredto their senses. With one voice they all declared that Sarah Good hadthus tormented them, by her power as a witch in league with the Devil. The truth of this charge, in the effect produced by the maligninfluence proceeding from her, was thus visible to all eyes. All saw, too, how instantly upon touching her the diabolical effect ceased; themalignant fluid passing back, like an electric stream, into the bodyof the witch. The spectacle was repeated once and again, the actingperfect, and the delusion consummated. The magistrates and all presentconsidered the guilt of the prisoner demonstrated, and regarded her aswilfully and wickedly obstinate in not at once confessing what hereyes, as well as theirs, saw. Her refusal to confess was considered asthe highest proof of her guilt. They passed judgment against her, committed her to the marshal, who hurried her to prison, bound herwith cords, and loaded her with irons; for it was thought that noordinary fastenings could hold a witch. Similar proceedings, withsuitable variations, were had with Sarah Osburn and Tituba. Theconfession of the last-named, the immediate relief thereafter of theafflicted children, and the dreadful torments which Tituba herselfexperienced, on the spot, from the unseen hand of the Devil wreakingvengeance upon her, put the finishing touch to the delusion. Theexcitement was kept up, and spread far and wide, by the officers andmagistrates riding in cavalcade, day after day, to and from the townand village; and by the constables, with their assistants, carryingtheir manacled prisoners from jail to jail in Ipswich, Salem, andBoston. 

The point was now reached when the accusers could safely strike athigher game. But time was taken to mature arrangements. Greatcuriosity was felt to know who the other two were whom Tituba saw inconnection with Good and Osburn in their hellish operations. The girlscontinued to suffer torments and fall in fits, and were constantlyurged by large numbers of people, going from house to house to witnesstheir sufferings, to reveal who the witches were that still afflictedthem. When all was prepared, they began to cry out, with more or lessdistinctness; at first, in significant but general descriptions, andat last calling names. The next victim was also well chosen. Anaccount has been given, in the First Part, of the notoriety whichcircumstances had attached to Giles Corey. In 1691 he became a memberof the church, being then (Vol. I. P. 182) eighty years of age. Fourdaughters, all probably by his first wife Margaret, the only childrenof whom there is any mention, were married to John Moulton, JohnParker, and Henry Crosby, of Salem, and William Cleaves, of Beverly. On the 11th of April, 1664, Corey was married to Mary Britt, who died, as appears by the inscription on her gravestone in the old Salemburial-ground, Aug. 27, 1684. Martha was his third wife. Her age isunknown. It was entered on the record of the village church, at thetime of her admission to it, April 27, 1690; but the figures are wornaway from the edge of the page. She was a very intelligent and devoutperson. 

When the proceedings relating to witchcraft began, she did not approveof them, and expressed her want of faith in the "afflicted children. "She discountenanced the whole affair, and would not follow themultitude to the examinations; but was said to have spoken freely ofthe course of the magistrates, saying that their eyes were blinded, and that she could open them. It seemed to her clear that they wereviolating common sense and the Word of God, and she was confident thatshe could convince them of their errors. Instead of falling into thedelusion, she applied herself with renewed earnestness to keep her ownmind under the influence of prayer, and spent more time in devotionthan ever before. Her husband, however, was completely carried away bythe prevalent fanaticism, believed all he heard, and frequented theexaminations and the exhibitions of the afflicted children. Thisdisagreement became quite serious. Her preferring to stay at home, shunning the proceedings, and expressing her disapprobation of whatwas going on, caused an estrangement between them. Her peculiar coursecreated comment, in which he and two of his sons-in-law took part. Some strong expressions were used by him, because she acted sostrangely at variance with everybody else. Her spending so much timeon her knees in devotion was looked upon as a matter of suspicion. Itwas said that she tried to prevent him from following up theexaminations, and went so far as to remove the saddle from the horsebrought up to convey him to some meeting at the village connected withthe witchcraft excitement. Angry words, uttered by him, were heard andrepeated. As she was a woman of notable piety, a professor ofreligion, and a member of the church, it was evident that her case, ifshe were proceeded against, would still more heighten the panic, andconvulse the public mind. It would give ground for an idea which themanagers of the affair desired to circulate, that the Devil hadsucceeded in making inroads into the very heart of the church, and wasbringing into confederacy with him aged and eminent church-members, who, under color of their profession, threatened to extend hisinfluence to the overthrow of all religion. It was, indeed, established in the popular sentiments, as a sign and mark of theDevil's coming, that many professing godliness would join hisstandard. 

For a day or two, it was whispered round that persons in great reputefor piety were in the diabolical confederacy, and about to beunmasked. The name of Martha Corey, whose open opposition to theproceedings had become known, was passed among the girls in anunder-breath, and caught from one to another among those managing theaffair. On the 12th of March, Edward Putnam and Ezekiel Cheever, having heard Ann Putnam declare that Goody Corey did often appear toher, and torture her by pinching and otherwise, thought it their dutyto go to her, and see what she would say to this complaint; "she beingin church covenant with us. " They mounted their horses about "themiddle of the afternoon, " and first went to the house of Thomas Putnamto see his daughter Ann, to learn from her what clothes Goody Coreyappeared to her in, in order to judge whether she might not have beenmistaken in the person. The girl told them, that Goody Corey, knowingthat they contemplated making this visit, had just appeared in spiritto her, but had blinded her so that she could not tell what clothesshe wore. Highly wrought upon by the extraordinary statement of thegirl, which they received with perfect credulity, the two brethrenremounted, and pursued their way. Goody Corey had heard that her namehad been bandied about by the accusing girls: she also knew that itwas one of their arts to pretend to see the clothes people werewearing at the time their spectres appeared to them. This required, indeed, no great amount of necromancy; as it is not probable thatthere was much variety in the costume of farmer's wives, at that time, while about their ordinary domestic engagements. 

They found her alone in her house. As soon as they commencedconversation, "in a smiling manner she said, 'I know what you are comefor; you are come to talk with me about being a witch, but I am none:I cannot help people's talking of me. '" Edward Putnam acknowledgedthat their visit was in consequence of complaints made against her bythe afflicted children. She inquired whether they had undertaken todescribe the clothes she then wore. They answered that they had not, and proceeded to repeat what Ann Putnam had said to them about herblinding her so that she could not see her clothes. At this shesmiled, no doubt at Ann's cunning artifice to escape having to saywhat dress she then had on. She declared to the two brethren, that"she did not think that there were any witches. " After considerabletalk, in which they did not get much to further their purpose, theytook their leave. The account of this interview, given by Putnam andCheever, indicates that Martha Corey was a sensible, enlightened, andsprightly woman, perfectly free from the delusion of the day, courteous in her manners and bearing, and a Christian, well groundedin Scripture. 

The two brethren returned forthwith to Thomas Putnam's house. Anntold them that Goody Corey had not troubled her, nor her spectreappeared, in their absence. She was not inclined to afford them anopportunity to apply the test of the dress. Both the women showedgreat acuteness and caution. As Corey expected the visit, and hadheard that the girls pretended to be able to say what dress personswere wearing, she probably had attired herself in an unusual way onthe occasion, to put them at fault, and expose the falseness of theirclaims to preternatural knowledge; and Ann Putnam--her sagacitysuggesting the risk she was running in the matter of Corey'sdress--took refuge in the pretence of blindness. The brethren were toomuch under delusion to see through the sharp practice of both of them, but considered the fact of Corey's inquiring of them whether Anndescribed her dress, as, under the circumstances, proof positiveagainst the former. 

Wishing to make assurance doubly sure, and to fasten the charge uponMartha Corey, the managers of the affair sent for her to come to thehouse of Thomas Putnam two days after this conference. Edward Putnamwas present, and testified that his niece Ann, immediately upon theentrance of Goodwife Corey, experienced the most dreadful convulsionsand tortures and distinctly and positively declared that Corey was theauthor of her sufferings. This was regarded as conclusive evidence;and, on the 19th of March, a warrant was issued for her arrest. Shewas brought to the house of Nathaniel Ingersoll, on Monday the 21st;and the following is the account of her examination, in thehandwriting of Mr. Parris. The proceedings took place in themeeting-house at the village. They were introduced by a prayer fromthe Rev. Nicholas Noyes. On some of these occasions Mr. Hale andperhaps others, but usually Mr. Noyes or Mr. Parris officiated. We maysuppose, from what we know of their general deportment in connectionwith these scenes, that their performances, under the cover of adevotional exercise, expressed and enforced a decided prejudgment ofthe case in hand against the prisoners, and partook of the characterof indictments as much as of prayers. 

 "_The Examination of Martha Corey. _

 "Mr. HATHORNE: You are now in the hands of authority. Tell me, now, why you hurt these persons. --I do not. 

 "Who doth?--Pray, give me leave to go to prayer. 

 "(This request was made sundry times. )

 "We do not send for you to go to prayer; but tell me why you hurt these. --I am an innocent person. I never had to do with witchcraft since I was born. I am a gospel woman. 

 "Do not you see these complain of you?--The Lord open the eyes of the magistrates and ministers: the Lord show his power to discover the guilty. 

 "Tell us who hurts these children. --I do not know. 

 "If you be guilty of this fact, do you think you can hide it?--The Lord knows. 

 "Well, tell us what you know of this matter. --Why, I am a gospel woman; and do you think I can have to do with witchcraft too?

 "How could you tell, then, that the child was bid to observe what clothes you wore, when some came to speak with you?

 "(Cheever interrupted her, and bid her not begin with a lie; and so Edward Putnam declared the matter. )

 "Mr. HATHORNE: Who told you that?--He said the child said. 

 "CHEEVER: You speak falsely. 

 "(Then Edward Putnam read again. )

 "Mr. HATHORNE: Why did you ask if the child told what clothes you wore?--My husband told me the others told. 

 "Who told you about the clothes? Why did you ask that question?--Because I heard the children told what clothes the others wore. 

 "Goodman Corey, did you tell her?

 "(The old man denied that he told her so. )

 "Did you not say your husband told you so?

 "(No answer. )

 "Who hurts these children? Now look upon them. --I cannot help it. 

 "Did you not say you would tell the truth why you asked that question? how came you to the knowledge?--I did but ask. 

 "You dare thus to lie in all this assembly. You are now before authority. I expect the truth: you promised it. Speak now, and tell who told you what clothes. --Nobody. 

 "How came you to know that the children would be examined what clothes you wore?--Because I thought the child was wiser than anybody if she knew. 

 "Give an answer: you said your husband told you. --He told me the children said I afflicted them. 

 "How do you know what they came for? Answer me this truly: will you say how you came to know what they came for?--I had heard speech that the children said I troubled them, and I thought that they might come to examine. 

 "But how did you know it?--I thought they did. 

 "Did not you say you would tell the truth? who told you what they came for?--Nobody. 

 "How did you know?--I did think so. 

 "But you said you knew so. 

 "(CHILDREN: There is a man whispering in her ear. )

 "HATHORNE continued: What did he say to you?--We must not believe all that these distracted children say. 

 "Cannot you tell what that man whispered?--I saw nobody. 

 "But did not you hear?--No. 

 "(Here was extreme agony of all the afflicted. )

 "If you expect mercy of God, you must look for it in God's way, by confession. Do you think to find mercy by aggravating your sins?--A true thing. 

 "Look for it, then, in God's way. --So I do. 

 "Give glory to God and confess, then. --But I cannot confess. 

 "Do not you see how these afflicted do charge you?--We must not believe distracted persons. 

 "Who do you improve to hurt them?--I improved none. 

 "Did not you say our eyes were blinded, you would open them?--Yes, to accuse the innocent. 

 "(Then Crosby gave in evidence. )

 "Why cannot the girl stand before you?--I do not know. 

 "What did you mean by that?--I saw them fall down. 

 "It seems to be an insulting speech, as if they could not stand before you. --They cannot stand before others. 

 "But you said they cannot stand before you. Tell me what was that turning upon the spit by you?--You believe the children that are distracted. I saw no spit. 

 "Here are more than two that accuse you for witchcraft. What do you say?--I am innocent. 

 "(Then Mr. Hathorne read further of Crosby's evidence. )

 "What did you mean by that, --the Devil could not stand before you?

 "(She denied it. Three or four sober witnesses confirmed it. )

 "What can I do? Many rise up against me. 

 "Why, confess. --So I would, if I were guilty. 

 "Here are sober persons. What do you say to them? You are a gospel woman; will you lie?

 "(Abigail cried out, 'Next sabbath is sacrament-day; but she shall not come there. ')

 "I do not care. 

 "You charge these children with distraction: it is a note of distraction when persons vary in a minute; but these fix upon you. This is not the manner of distraction. --When all are against me, what can I help it?

 "Now tell me the truth, will you? Why did you say that the magistrates' and ministers' eyes were blinded, you would open them?

 "(She laughed, and denied it. )

 "Now tell us how we shall know who doth hurt these, if you do not?--Can an innocent person be guilty?

 "Do you deny these words?--Yes. 

 "Tell us who hurts these. We came to be a terror to evil-doers. You say you would open our eyes, we are blind. --If you say I am a witch. 

 "You said you would show us. 

 "(She denied it. )

 "Why do you not now show us?--I cannot tell: I do not know. 

 "What did you strike the maid at Mr. Tho. Putnam's with?--I never struck her in my life. 

 "There are two that saw you strike her with an iron rod. --I had no hand in it. 

 "Who had? Do you believe these children are bewitched?--They may, for aught I know: I have no hand in it. 

 "You say you are no witch. Maybe you mean you never covenanted with the Devil. Did you never deal with any familiar?--No, never. 

 "What bird was that the children spoke of?

 "(Then witnesses spoke: What bird was it?)

 "I know no bird. 

 "It may be you have engaged you will not confess; but God knows. --So he doth. 

 "Do you believe you shall go unpunished?--I have nothing to do with witchcraft. 

 "Why was you not willing your husband should come to the former session here?--But he came, for all. 

 "Did not you take the saddle off?--I did not know what it was for. 

 "Did you not know what it was for?--I did not know that it would be to any benefit. 

 "(Somebody said that she would not have them help to find out witches. )

 "Did you not say you would open our eyes? Why do you not?--I never thought of a witch. 

 "Is it a laughing matter to see these afflicted persons?

 "(She denied it. Several prove it. )

 "Ye are all against me, and I cannot help it. 

 "Do not you believe there are witches in the country?--I do not know that there is any. 

 "Do not you know that Tituba confessed it?--I did not hear her speak. 

 "I find you will own nothing without several witnesses, and yet you will deny for all. 

 "(It was noted, when she bit her lip, several of the afflicted were bitten. When she was urged upon it that she bit her lip, saith she, What harm is there in it?)

 "(Mr. NOYES: I believe it is apparent she practiseth witchcraft in the congregation: there is no need of images. )

 "What do you say to all these things that are apparent?--If you will all go hang me, how can I help it?

 "Were you to serve the Devil ten years? Tell how many. 

 "(She laughed. The children cried there was a yellow-bird with her. When Mr. Hathorne asked her about it, she laughed. When her hands were at liberty, the afflicted persons were pinched. )

 "Why do not you tell how the Devil comes in your shape, and hurts these? You said you would. --How can I know how?

 "Why did you say you would show us?

 "(She laughed again. )

 "What book is that you would have these children write in?--What book? Where should I have a book? I showed them none, nor have none, nor brought none. 

 "(The afflicted cried out there was a man whispering in her ears. )

 "What book did you carry to Mary Walcot?--I carried none. If the Devil appears in my shape--

 "(Then Needham said that Parker, some time ago, thought this woman was a witch. )

 "Who is your God?--The God that made me. 

 "What is his name?--Jehovah. 

 "Do you know any other name?--God Almighty. 

 "Doth _he_ tell you, that you pray to, that _he_ is God Almighty?--Who do I worship but the God that made [me]?

 "How many gods are there?--One. 

 "How many persons?--Three. 

 "Cannot you say, So there is one God in three blessed persons?

 [The answer is destroyed, being written in the fold of the paper, and wholly worn off. ]

 "Do not you see these children and women are rational and sober as their neighbors, when your hands are fastened?

 "(Immediately they were seized with fits: and the standers-by said she was squeezing her fingers, her hands being eased by them that held them on purpose for trial. 

 "Quickly after, the marshal said, 'She hath bit her lip;' and immediately the afflicted were in an uproar. )

 "[Tell] why you hurt these, or who doth?

 "(She denieth any hand in it. )

 "Why did you say, if you were a witch, you should have no pardon?--Because I am a ---- woman. "

 "Salem Village, March the 21st, 1692. --The Reverend Mr. Samuel Parris, being desired to take, in writing, the examination of Martha Corey, hath returned it, as aforesaid. 

 "Upon hearing the aforesaid, and seeing what we did then see, together with the charges of the persons then present, we committed Martha Corey, the wife of Giles Corey, of Salem Farms, unto the gaol in Salem, as _per mittimus_ then given out. "

 [Illustration: [signatures]]

The foregoing is a full copy of the original document. One of GilesCorey's daughters, Deliverance, had married, June 5, 1683, HenryCrosby, who lived on land conveyed to him by her father in theimmediate neighborhood. He was the person whose written testimony wasread by the magistrate. Its purport seems to have been to prove thatMartha Corey had said that the accusing girls could not stand beforeher, and that the Devil could not stand before her. She had, undoubtedly, great confidence in her own innocence, and in the powerof truth and prayer, to silence false accusers, and expressed herselfin the forcible language which Parris's report of the examinationshows that she was well able to use. It is almost amusing to see howthe pride of the magistrates was touched, and their wrath kindled, bywhat she was reported to have said, "that the magistrates' andministers' eyes were blinded, and that she would open them. " Itrankled in Hathorne's breast: he returns to it again and again, andworks himself up to a higher degree of resentment on each recurrence. Mr. Noyes's ire was roused, and he, too, put in a stroke. It will benoticed, that she avoided a contradiction of her husband, and couldnot be brought to give the names of persons from whom she had receivedinformation. "If you will all go hang me, how can I help it?" "Ye areall against me. " "What can I do, when many rise up against me?" "Whenall are against me, what can I [say to] help it?" Situated as she was, all that she could do was to give them no advantage, or opportunity toensnare her, and to avoid compromising others; and it must be allowedthat she showed much presence and firmness of mind. Her request, madeat the opening of the examination, and at "sundry times, " to "go toprayer, " somewhat confounded them. She probably was led to make andurge the request particularly in consequence of the tenor of Mr. Noyes's prayer at the opening. She felt that it was no more than fairthat there should be a prayer on her side, as well as on the other. Itmight well be feared, that, if allowed to offer a prayer, coming froma person in her situation, an aged professor, and one accustomed toexpress herself in devotional exercises, it might produce a deepimpression upon the whole assembly. To refuse such a request had ahard look; but, as the magistrates saw, it never would have done tohave permitted it. It would have reversed the position of allconcerned. The latter part of the examination has the appearance thatshe was suspected to be unsound on a particular article of theprevalent creed. It is much to be regretted that the abrasion of thepaper at the folding has obliterated her last answer to this part ofthe inquisition. It is singular that Mr. Parris has left the blank inher final answer. Probably she used her customary expression, "I am agospel woman. " The writing, at this point, is very clear and distinct;and a vacant space is left, just as it is given above. 

The fact that Martha Corey was known to be an eminently religiousperson, and very much given to acts of devotion, constituted a seriousobstacle, no doubt, in the way of the prosecutors. Parris's record ofthe examination shows how they managed to get over it. They gave theimpression that her frequent and long prayers were addressed to theDevil. 

The disagreement between her and her husband, touching the witchcraftprosecutions, brought him into a very uncomfortable predicament. Withhis characteristic imprudence of speech, he had probably expressedhimself strongly against her unbelief in the sufferings of the girlsand her refusal to attend the exhibitions of their tortures, or theexamination of persons accused. He was, unquestionably, highly shockedand incensed at her open repudiation of the whole doctrine ofwitchcraft. Although he had become, in his old age, a professor and afervently religious man, perhaps he fell back, in his resentment ofher course, into his life-long rough phrases, and said that she actedas though the Devil was in her. He might have said that she prayedlike a witch. Being entirely carried away by the delusion, he had hisown marvellous stories to tell about his cattle's being bewitched, &c. His talk, undoubtedly, came to the ears of the prosecutors; andthey seem to have taken steps to induce him to come forward as awitness against her. The following document is among the papers:--

 "The evidence of Giles Corey testifieth and saith, that last Saturday, in the evening, sitting by the fire, my wife asked me to go to bed. I told her I would go to prayer; and, when I went to prayer, I could not utter my desires with any sense, nor open my mouth to speak. 

 "My wife did perceive it, and came towards me, and said she was coming to me. 

 "After this, in a little space, I did, according to my measure, attend the duty. 

 "Some time last week, I fetched an ox, well, out of the woods about noon: and, he laying down in the yard, I went to raise him to yoke him; but he could not rise, but dragged his hinder parts, as if he had been hip-shot. But after did rise. 

 "I had a cat sometimes last week strangely taken on the sudden, and did make me think she would have died presently. My wife bid me knock her in the head, but I did not; and since, she is well. 

 "Another time, going to duties, I was interrupted for a space; but afterward I was helped according to my poor measure. My wife hath been wont to sit up after I went to bed: and I have perceived her to kneel down on the hearth, as if she were at prayer, but heard nothing. 

 "_At the examination of Sarah_ Good and others, my wife was willing

 "March 24, 1692. "

The foregoing document does not express the idea that he thought hiswife was a witch. He states what he observed, and what happened to himand to his cattle. He evidently supposed they were bewitched, and thathe was obstructed, in going to prayer, in a strange manner; but hedoes not, in terms, charge it upon her. It gives an interestinginsight of the innermost domestic life of the period, in a farmhouse, and exhibits striking touches of the character and ways of these twoold people. It illustrates the state of the imagination prevailingamong those who were carried away by the delusion. If an ox had asprained muscle, or a cat a fit of indigestion, it was thought to bethe work of an evil hand. Poor old Giles had come late to a religiouslife, and, it is to be feared, was a novice in prayer. It is no wonderthat he was not an adept in "uttering his desires, " and experiencedoccasionally some difficulty in arranging and expressing hisdevotional sentiments. 

There is something very singular in the appearance of the foregoingdeposition. Purporting to be a piece of testimony, it was not given inthe usual and regular way. It does not indicate before whom it wasmade. It is not attested in the ordinary manner; apparently, was notsworn to in the presence of persons authorized to act in such cases;was never offered in court or anywhere. It is a disconnected paperfound among the remnants of the miscellaneous collection in theclerk's office, and is evidently an unfinished document; the words inItalics, at the close, being erased by a line running through them. 

It is probable that the parties who tried to get the old man totestify against his wife discovered that they could not draw any thingfrom him to answer their designs, but that there was danger that hisevidence would be favorable to her, and gave up the attempt to use himon the occasion. The fact that he would not lend himself to theirpurposes perhaps led to resentment on their part, which may explainthe subsequent proceedings against him. 

The document, in its chirography, suggests the idea that it waswritten by Mr. Noyes, which is not improbable, as Corey was a memberof his congregation and church. Noyes was deeply implicated in theprosecutions, and violent in driving them on. The handwriting of theoriginal papers reveals the agency of those who were the most busy inprocuring evidence against persons accused. That of Thomas Putnamoccurs in very many instances. But Mr. Parris was, beyond all others, the busiest and most active prosecutor. The depositions of the childAbigail Williams, his niece and a member of his family, were writtenby him, as also a great number of others. He took down most of theexaminations, put in a deposition of his own whenever he could, andwas always ready to indorse those of others. 

It will be remembered, that, when Tituba was put through herexamination, she said "four women sometimes hurt the children. " Shenamed Good and Osburn, but pretended to have been blinded as to theothers. Martha Corey was, in due time, as we have seen, brought out. The fourth was the venerable head of a large and prominent family, anda member of the mother-church in Salem. She had never transferred herrelations to the village church, with which, however, she hadgenerally worshipped, and probably communed. Being one of the chiefmatrons of the place, she was seated in the meeting-house with ladiesof similar age and standing, occupying the same bench or compartmentwith the widow of Thomas Putnam, Sr. The women were seated separatelyfrom the men; and the only rule applied among them was eminence inyears and respectability. 

It has always been considered strange and unaccountable, that a personof such acknowledged worth as Rebecca Nurse, of infirm health andadvanced years, should have been selected among the early victims ofthe witchcraft prosecutions. Jealousies and prejudices, such as ofteninfest rural neighborhoods, may have been engendered, in minds open tosuch influences, by the prosperity and growing influence of herfamily. It may be that animosities kindled by the long and violentland controversy, with which many parties had been incidentallyconnected, lingered in some breasts. There are decided indications, that the passions awakened by the angry contest between the villageand "Topsfield men, " and which the collisions of a half-century hadall along exasperated and hardened, may have been concentrated againstthe Nurses. Isaac Easty, whose wife was a sister of Rebecca Nurse, andthe Townes, who were her brothers or near kinsmen, were the leadersof the Topsfield men. It is a significant circumstance, in thisconnection, that to one of the most vehement resolutions passed atmeetings of the inhabitants of the village, against the claims ofTopsfield, Samuel Nurse, her eldest son, and Thomas Preston, hereldest son-in-law, entered their protest on the record; and, onanother similar occasion, her husband Francis Nurse, her son Samuel, and two of her sons-in-law, Preston and Tarbell, took the same course. So far as the family sided with Topsfield in that controversy, itnaturally exposed them to the ill-will of the people of the village. An analysis of the names and residences of the persons proceededagainst, throughout the prosecutions, will show to what an extenthostile motives were supplied from this quarter. The families ofWildes, How, Hobbs, Towne, Easty, and others who were "cried out" uponby the afflicted children, occupied lands claimed by parties adverseto the village. What, more than all these causes, was sufficient tocreate a feeling against the Nurses, is the fact that they wereopposed to the party which had existed from the beginning in theparish composed originally of the friends of Bayley. To crown thewhole, when the excitement occasioned by the extraordinary doings inMr. Parris's family began to display itself, and the "afflictedchildren" were brought into notice, the members of this family, withthe exception, for a time, of Thomas Preston, discountenanced thewhole thing. They absented themselves from meeting, on account of thedisturbances and disorders the girls were allowed to make during theservices of worship, in the congregation, on the Lord's Day. Unfriendly remarks, from whatever cause, made in the hearing of thegirls, provided subjects for them to act upon. Some persons behindthem, suggesting names in this way, whether carelessly or withmalicious intent, were guilty of all the misery that was created andblood that was shed. 

It became a topic of rumor, that Rebecca Nurse was soon to be broughtout. It reached the ears of her friends, and the following documentcomes in at this point:--

 "We whose names are underwritten being desired to go to Goodman Nurse his house, to speak with his wife, and to tell her that several of the afflicted persons mentioned her; and accordingly we went, and we found her in a weak and low condition in body as she told us, and had been sick almost a week. And we asked how it was otherwise with her: and she said she blessed God for it, she had more of his presence in this sickness than sometime she have had, but not so much as she desired; but she would, with the apostle, press forward to the mark; and many other places of Scripture to the like purpose. And then, of her own accord, she began to speak of the affliction that was amongst them, and in particular of Mr. Parris his family, and how she was grieved for them, though she had not been to see them, by reason of fits that she formerly used to have; for people said it was awful to behold: but she pitied them with all her heart, and went to God for them. But she said she heard that there was persons spoke of that were as innocent as she was, she believed; and, after much to this purpose, we told her we heard that she was spoken of also. 'Well, ' she said, 'if it be so, the will of the Lord be done:' she sat still a while, being as it were amazed; and then she said, 'Well, as to this thing I am as innocent as the child unborn; but surely, ' she said, 'what sin hath God found out in me unrepented of, that he should lay such an affliction upon me in my old age?' and, according to our best observation, we could not discern that she knew what we came for before we told her. 

 ISRAEL PORTER, ELIZABETH PORTER. 

 "To the substance of what is above, we, if called thereto, are ready to testify on oath. 

 DANIEL ANDREW, PETER CLOYSE. "

Elizabeth Porter, who joins her husband in making this statement, wasa sister of John Hathorne, the examining magistrate, and themother-in-law of Joseph Putnam, who was among the very few thatcondemned the proceedings from the first. She stood, therefore, between the two parties. The character of each of the signers andindorsers of this interesting paper is sufficient proof that itsstatements are truthful. It cannot but excite the most affectingsensibilities in every breast. This venerable lady, whose conversationand bearing were so truly saint-like, was an invalid of extremelydelicate condition and appearance, the mother of a large family, embracing sons, daughters, grandchildren, and one or moregreat-grandchildren. She was a woman of piety, and simplicity ofheart. In all probability, she shared in the popular belief on thesubject of witchcraft, and supposed that the sufferings of thechildren were real, and that they were afflicted by an "evil hand. " Atthe very time that she was sorrowfully sympathizing with them and Mr. Parris's family, and praying for them, they were circulatingsuspicions against her, and maturing their plans for her destruction. 

Rebecca Nurse was a daughter of William Towne, of Yarmouth, NorfolkCounty, England, where she was baptized, Feb. 21, 1621. Her sisterMary, who married Isaac Easty, was baptized at the same place, Aug. 24, 1634. The records of the First Church at Salem, Sept. 3, 1648, give the baptism of "Joseph and Sarah, children of Sister Towne. "Sarah was at that time seven years of age. She became the wife ofEdmund Bridges, and afterwards of Peter Cloyse. 

On the 23d of March, a warrant was issued, on complaint of EdwardPutnam, and Jonathan, son of John Putnam, for the arrest of "Rebecca, wife of Francis Nurse;" and the next morning, at eight o'clock, shewas brought to the house of Nathaniel Ingersoll, in the custody ofGeorge Herrick, the marshal of Essex. There were several distinctindictments, four of which, for having practised "certain detestablearts called witchcraft" upon Ann Putnam, Mary Walcot, ElizabethHubbard, and Abigail Williams, are preserved. The examination tookplace forthwith at the meeting-house. The age, character, connections, and appearance of the prisoner, made the occasion one of the extremestinterest. Hathorne, the magistrate, began the proceedings byaddressing one of the afflicted: "What do you say? Have you seen thiswoman hurt you?" The answer was, "Yes, she beat me this morning. "Hathorne, addressing another of the afflicted, said, "Abigail, haveyou been hurt by this woman?" Abigail answered, "Yes. " At that point, Ann Putnam fell into a grievous fit, and, while in her spasms, criedout that it was Rebecca Nurse who was thus afflicting her. As soon asAnn's fit was over, and order restored, Hathorne said, "Goody Nurse, here are two, Ann Putnam the child, and Abigail Williams, complain ofyour hurting them. What do you say to it?" The prisoner replied, "Ican say, before my eternal Father, I am innocent, and God will clearmy innocency. " Hathorne, apparently touched for the moment by herlanguage and bearing, said, "Here is never a one in the assembly butdesires it; but, if you be guilty, pray God discover you. " HenryKenney rose up from the body of the assembly to speak. Hathornepermitted the interruption, and said, "Goodman Kenney, what do yousay?" Then Kenney complained of the prisoner, "and further said, sincethis Nurse came into the house, he was seized twice with an amazedcondition. " Hathorne, addressing the prisoner, said, "Not only these, but the wife of Mr. Thomas Putnam, accuseth you by credibleinformation, and that both of tempting her to iniquity and of greatlyhurting her. " The prisoner again affirmed her innocence, and said, inanswer to the charge of having hurt these persons, that "she had notbeen able to get out of doors these eight or nine days. " Hathornethen called upon Edward Putnam, who, as the record says, "gave in hisrelate, " which undoubtedly was a statement of his having seen theafflicted in their sufferings, and heard them accuse Rebecca Nurse astheir tormentor. Hathorne said, "Is this true, Goody Nurse?" Shedenied that she had ever hurt them or any one else in her life. Hathorne repeated, "You see these accuse you: is it true?" Sheanswered, "No. " He again put the question, "Are you an innocent personrelating to this witchcraft?" It seems, from his manner, that he wasbeginning really to doubt whether she might not be innocent; andperhaps the feeling of the multitude was yielding in her favor. 

Here Thomas Putnam's wife cried out, "Did you not bring the black manwith you? Did you not bid me tempt God, and die? How oft have you eatand drank your own damnation?" This sudden outbreak, from such asource, accompanied with the wild and apparently supernatural energyand uncontrollable vehemence with which the words were uttered, rousedthe multitude to the utmost pitch of horror; and the prisoner seems tohave been shocked at the dreadful exhibition of madness in the womanand in the assembly. Releasing her hands from confinement, she spreadthem out towards heaven, and exclaimed, "O Lord, help me!" Instantly, the whole company of the afflicted children "were grievously vexed. "After a while, the tumult subsided, and Hathorne again addressed her, "Do you not see what a solemn condition these are in? When your handsare loosed, the persons are afflicted. " Then Mary Walcot and ElizabethHubbard came forward, and accused her. Hathorne again addressed her, "Here are these two grown persons now accuse. What say you? Do not yousee these afflicted persons, and hear them accuse you?" She answered, "The Lord knows I have not hurt them. I am an innocent person. "Hathorne continued, "It is very awful to all to see these agonies, andyou, an old professor, thus charged with contracting with the Devil bythe effects of it, and yet to see you stand with dry eyes where thereare so many wet. " She answered, "You do not know my heart. " Hathorne, "You would do well, if you are guilty, to confess, and give glory toGod. "--"I am as clear as the child unborn. " Hathorne continued, "Whatuncertainty there may be in apparitions, I know not: yet this with mestrikes hard upon you, that you are, at this very present, chargedwith familiar spirits, --this is your bodily person they speak to; theysay now they see these familiar spirits come to your bodily person. Now, what do you say to that?"--"I have none, sir. "--"If you have, confess, and give glory to God. I pray God clear you, if you beinnocent, and, if you are guilty, discover you; and therefore give mean upright answer. Have you any familiarity with these spirits?"--"No:I have none but with God alone. " It looks as if again the magistratebegan to open his mind to a fair view of the case. He seems to havesought satisfaction in reference to all the charges that had beenmade against her. She was suffering from infirmities of body, theresult not only of age, but of the burdens of life often pressing downthe physical frame, particularly of those who have borne largefamilies of children. The magistrate had heard some malignant gossipof this kind, and he asked, "How came you sick? for there is an odddiscourse of that in the mouths of many. " She replied that shesuffered from weakness of stomach. He inquired, more specifically, "Have you no wounds?" Her answer was, that her ailments andweaknesses, all her bodily infirmities, were the natural effects ofwhat she had experienced in a long life. "I have none but oldage. "--"You do know whether you are guilty, and have familiarity withthe Devil; and now, when you are here present, to see such a thing asthese testify, --a black man whispering in your ear, and birds aboutyou, --what do you say to it?"--"It is all false: I amclear. "--"Possibly, you may apprehend you are no witch; but have younot been led aside by temptations that way?"--"I have not. " At thispoint, it almost seems that Hathorne was yielding to the moral effectof the evidence she bore in her deportment and language, the impressof conscious innocence in her countenance, and the manifestation oftrue Christian purity and integrity in her whole manner and bearing. Instead of pressing her with further interrogatories, he gave way toan expression, in the form of a soliloquy or ejaculation, "What a sadthing is it, that a church-member here, and now another of Salem, should thus be accused and charged!" Upon hearing this ratherambiguous expression of the magistrate, Mrs. Pope fell into a grievousfit. 

Mrs. Pope was the wife of Joseph Pope, living with his mother, thewidow Gertrude Pope, on the farm shown on the map. She had followed upthe meetings of the circle, been a constant witness of the sufferingsof the "afflicted children, " and attended all the public examinations, until her nervous system was excited beyond restraint, and for a whileshe went into fits and her imagination was bewildered. She acted withthe accusers, and participated in their sufferings. On some occasions, her conduct was wild and extravagant to the highest degree. At theexamination of Martha Corey, she was conspicuous for the violence ofher actions. In the midst of the proceedings, and in the presence ofthe magistrates and hundreds of people, she threw her muff at theprisoner; and, that missing, pulled off her shoe, and, more successfulthis time, hit her square on the head. Hers seems, however, to havebeen a case of mere delusion, amounting to temporary insanity. That itwas not deliberate and cold-blooded imposture is rendered probable bythe fact, that she was rescued from the hallucination, and, with herhusband, among the foremost to deplore and denounce the whole affair. But, when a woman of her position acted in this manner, on such anoccasion, and then went into convulsions, and the whole company ofafflicted persons joined in, the confusion, tumult, and frightfulnessof the scene can hardly be imagined, certainly it cannot be describedin words. 

Quiet being restored, Hathorne proceeded: "Tell us, have you not hadvisible appearances, more than what is common in nature?"--"I havenone, nor never had in my life. "--"Do you think these suffer voluntaryor involuntary?"--"I cannot tell. "--"That is strange: every one canjudge. "--"I must be silent. "--"They accuse you of hurting them; and, if you think it is not unwillingly, but by design, you must look uponthem as murderers. "--"I cannot tell what to think of it. " This answerwas considered as very aspersive in its bearing upon the witnesses, and she was charged with having called them murderers. Being hard ofhearing, she did not always take in the whole import of questions putto her. She denied that she said she thought them murderers; all shesaid, and that she stood to to the last, was that she could not tellwhat to make of their conduct. Finally, Hathorne put this question, and called for an answer, "Do you think these suffer against theirwills or not?" She answered, "I do not think these suffer againsttheir wills. " To this point she was not afraid or unwilling to go, ingiving an opinion of the conduct of the accusing girls. Infirm, halfdeaf, cross-questioned, circumvented, surrounded with folly, uproar, and outrage, as she was, they could not intimidate her to say less, orentrap her to say more. 

Then another line of criminating questions was started by themagistrate: "Why did you never visit these afflictedpersons?"--"Because I was afraid I should have fits too. " On everymotion of her body, "fits followed upon the complainants, abundantlyand very frequently. " As soon as order was again restored, Hathorne, being, as he always was, wholly convinced of the reality of thesufferings of the "afflicted children, " addressed her thus, "Is it notan unaccountable case, that, when you are examined, these persons areafflicted?" Seeing that he and the whole assembly put faith in theaccusers, her only reply was, "I have got nobody to look to but God. "As she uttered these words, she naturally attempted to raise herhands, whereupon "the afflicted persons were seized with violent fitsof torture. " After silence was again restored, the magistrate pressedhis questions still closer. "Do you believe these afflicted personsare bewitched?" She answered, "I do think they are. " It will benoticed that there was this difference between Rebecca Nurse andMartha Corey: The latter was an utter heretic on the point of thepopular faith respecting witchcraft; she did not believe that therewere any witches, and she looked upon the declarations and actions ofthe "afflicted children" as the ravings of "distracted persons. " Theformer seems to have held the opinions of the day, and had nodisbelief in witchcraft: she was willing to admit that the childrenwere bewitched; but she knew her own innocence, and nothing could moveher from the consciousness of it. Mr. Hathorne continued, "When thiswitchcraft came upon the stage, there was no suspicion of Tituba, Mr. Parris's Indian woman. She professed much love to that child, --BettyParris; but it was her apparition did the mischief: and why should notyou also be guilty, for your apparition doth hurt also?" Her answerwas, "Would you have me belie myself?" Weary, probably, of theprotracted proceedings, her head drooped on one side; and forthwiththe necks of the afflicted children were bent in the same way. Thisnew demonstration of the diabolical power that proceeded from herfilled the house with increased awe, and spread horrible conviction ofher guilt through all minds. Elizabeth Hubbard's neck was fixed inthat direction, and could not be moved. Abigail Williams cried out, "Set up Goody Nurse's head, the maid's neck will be broke. " Whereupon, some persons held the prisoner's head up, and "Aaron Way observed thatBetty Hubbard's was immediately righted. " To consummate the effect ofthe whole proceeding, Mr. Parris, by direction of the magistrates, "read what he had in characters taken from Mr. Thomas Putnam's wife inher fits. " We shall come to the matter thus introduced by Mr. Parris, at a future stage of the story. It is sufficient here to say, that itcontained the most positive and minute declarations that theapparition of Rebecca Nurse had appeared to her, on several occasions, and horribly tortured her. After hearing Parris's statement, Hathorneasked the prisoner, "What do you think of this?" Her reply was, "Icannot help it: the Devil may appear in my shape. " It may bementioned, that Mrs. Ann Putnam was present during this examination, and, in the course of it, went into the most dreadful bodily agony, charging it on Rebecca Nurse. Her sufferings were so violent, and heldon so long, that the magistrates gave permission to her husband tocarry her out of the meeting-house, to free her from the malignantpresence of the prisoner. The record of the examination closes thus:--

 "Salem Village, March 24th, 1691/2. --The Reverend Mr. Samuel Parris, being desired to take in writing the examination of Rebecca Nurse, hath returned it as aforesaid. 

 "Upon hearing the aforesaid, and seeing what we then did see, together with the charges of the persons then present, we committed Rebecca Nurse, the wife of Francis Nurse of Salem Village, unto Her Majesty's jail in Salem, as _per mittimus_ then given out, in order to further examination. "

 [Illustration: [signatures]]

The presence of Ann Putnam, the mother, on this occasion; thestatement from her, read by Mr. Parris; and the terrible sufferingsshe exhibited, produced, no doubt, a deep effect upon the magistratesand all present. Her social position and personal appearanceundoubtedly contributed to heighten it. For two months, her house hadbeen the constant scene of the extraordinary actings of the circle ofgirls of which her daughter and maid-servant were the leadingspirits. Her mind had been absorbed in the mysteries of spiritualism. The marvels of necromancy and magic had been kept perpetually beforeit. She had been living in the invisible world, with a constant senseof supernaturalism surrounding her. Unconsciously, perhaps, thepassions, prejudices, irritations, and animosities, to which she hadbeen subject, became mixed with the vagaries of an excitedimagination; and, laid open to the inroads of delusion as her mind hadlong been by perpetual tamperings with spiritual ideas and phantoms, she may have lost the balance of reason and sanity. This, added to amorbid sensibility, probably gave a deep intensity to her voice, action, and countenance. The effect upon the excited multitude musthave been very great. Although she lived to realize the utterfalseness of all her statements, her monstrous fictions were felt byher, at the time, to be a reality. 

In concluding his report of this examination, Mr. Parris says, "Byreason of great noises by the afflicted and many speakers, many thingsare pretermitted. " He was probably quite willing to avoid telling thewhole story of the disgraceful and shocking scenes enacted in themeeting-house that day. Deodat Lawson was present during the earlierpart of the proceedings. He says that Mr. Hale began with prayer; thatthe prisoner "pleaded her innocency with earnestness;" that, at theopening, some of the girls, Mary Walcot among them, declared that theprisoner had never hurt them. Presently, however, Mary Walcot screamedout that she was bitten, and charged it upon Rebecca Nurse. The marksof teeth were produced on her wrist. Lawson says, "It was so disposedthat I had not leisure to attend the whole time of examination. " Themeaning is, I suppose, that he desired to withdraw into theneighboring fields to con over his manuscript, and make himself moreable to perform with effect the part he was to act that afternoon. "There was once, " he says, "such an hideous screech and noise (which Iheard as I walked at a little distance from the meeting-house) as didamaze me; and some that were within told me the whole assembly wasstruck with consternation, and they were afraid that those that satnext to them were under the influence of witchcraft. " The wholecongregation was in an uproar, every one afflicted by and affrightingevery other, amid a universal outcry of terror and horror. 

As it was a part of the policy of the managers of the business toutterly overwhelm the influence of all natural sentiment in thecommunity, they coupled with this proceeding against a venerable andinfirm great-grandmother, another of the same kind against a littlechild. Immediately after the examination of Rebecca Nurse wasconcluded, Dorcas, a daughter of Sarah Good, was brought before themagistrates. She was between four and five years old. Lawson says, "The child looked hale and well as other children. " A warrant had beenissued for her apprehension, the day before, on complaint of Edwardand Jonathan Putnam. Herrick the marshal, who was a man that magnifiedhis office, and of much personal pride, did not, perhaps, fancy theidea of bringing up such a little prisoner; and he deputized theoperation to Samuel Braybrook, who, the next morning, made return, indue form, that "he had taken the body of Dorcas Good, " and sent her tothe house of Nathaniel Ingersoll, where she was in custody. It seemsthat Braybrook did not like the job, and passed the handling of thechild over to still another. Whoever performed the service probablybrought her in his arms, or on a pillion. The little thing could nothave walked the distance from Benjamin Putnam's farm. When led in tobe examined, Ann Putnam, Mary Walcot, and Mercy Lewis, all charged herwith biting, pinching, and almost choking them. The two former wentthrough their usual evolutions in the presence of the awe and terrorstricken magistrates and multitude. They showed the marks of herlittle teeth on their arms; and the pins with which she pricked themwere found on their bodies, precisely where, in their shrieks, theyhad averred that she was piercing them. The evidence was consideredoverwhelming; and Dorcas was, _per mittimus_, committed to the jail, where she joined her mother. By the bill of the Boston jailer, itappears that they both were confined there: as they were too poor toprovide for themselves, "the country" was charged with ten shillingsfor "two blankets for Sarah Good's child. " The mother, we know, waskept in chains; the child was probably chained too. Extraordinaryfastenings, as has been stated, were thought necessary to hold awitch. 

There was no longer any doubt, in the mass of the community, that theDevil had effected a lodgement at Salem Village. Church-members, persons of all social positions, of the highest repute and professionof piety, eminent for visible manifestations of devotion, and of everyage, had joined his standard, and become his active allies andconfederates. 

The effect of these two examinations was unquestionably very great inspreading consternation and bewilderment far and wide; but they wereonly the prelude to the work, to that end, arranged for the day. Thepublic mind was worked to red heat, and now was the moment to strikethe blow that would fix an impression deep and irremovable upon it. Itwas Thursday, Lecture-day; and the public services usual on theoccasion were to be held at the meeting-house. 

Deodat Lawson had arrived at the village on the 19th of March, andlodged at Deacon Ingersoll's. The fact at once became known; and MaryWalcot immediately went to the deacon's to see him. She had a fit onthe spot, which filled Lawson with amazement and horror. His turn ofmind led him to be interested in such an excitement; and he had becomeadditionally and specially exercised by learning that the afflictedpersons had intimated that the deaths of his wife and daughter, whichoccurred during his ministry at the village, had been brought about bythe diabolical agency of the persons then beginning to be unmasked, and brought to justice. He was prepared to listen to the hints thusthrown out, and was ready to push the prosecutions on with anearnestness in which resentment and rage were mingled with theblindest credulity. After Mary Walcot had given him a specimen of whatthe girls were suffering, he walked over, early in the evening, to Mr. Parris's house; and there Abigail Williams went into the craziestmanifestations, throwing firebrands about the house in the presence ofher uncle, rushing to the back of the chimney as though she would flyup through its wide flue, and performing many wonderful works. Thenext day being Sunday, he preached; and the services were interrupted, in the manner already described, by the outbreaks of the afflicted, under diabolic influence. The next day, he attended the examination ofMartha Corey. On Wednesday, the 23d, he went up to Thomas Putnam's, ashe says, "on purpose to see his wife. " He "found her lying on the bed, having had a sore fit a little before: her husband and she bothdesired me to pray with her while she was sensible, which I did, though the apparition said I should not go to prayer. At the firstbeginning, she attended; but, after a little time, was taken with afit, yet continued silent, and seemed to be asleep. " She hadrepresented herself as being in conflict with the shape, or spectre, of a witch, which, she told Lawson, said he should not pray on theoccasion. But he courageously ventured on the work. At the conclusionof the prayer, "her husband, going to her, found her in a fit. He tookher off the bed to sit her on his knees; but at first she was so stiffshe could not be bended, but she afterwards sat down. " Then she wentinto that state of supernatural vision and exaltation in which she wasaccustomed to utter the wildest strains, in fervid, extravagant, butsolemn and melancholy, rhapsodies: she disputed with the spectre abouta text of Scripture, and then poured forth the most terribledenunciations upon it for tormenting and tempting her. She wasevidently a very intellectual and imaginative woman, and was perfectlyversed in all the imagery and lofty diction supplied by the propheticand poetic parts of Scripture. Again she was seized with a terriblefit, that lasted "near half an hour. " At times, her mouth was drawn onone side and her body strained. At last she broke forth, andsucceeded, after many violent struggles against the spectre and manyconvulsions of her frame, in saying what part of the Bible Lawson wasto read aloud, in order to relieve her. "It is, " she said, "the thirdchapter of the Revelation. "--"I did, " says Lawson, "something scruplethe reading it. " He was loath to be engaged in an affair of that kindin which the Devil was an actor. At length he overcame his scruples, and the effect was decisive. "Before I had near read through the firstverse, she opened her eyes, and was well. " Bewildered and amazed, hewent back to Parris's house, and they talked over the awfulmanifestations of Satan's power. The next morning, he attended theexamination of Rebecca Nurse, retiring from it, at an early hour, tocomplete his preparation for the service that had been arranged forhim that afternoon. 

I say arranged, because the facts in this case prove long-concertedarrangement. He was to preach a sermon that day. Word must have beensent to him weeks before. After reaching the village, every hour hadbeen occupied in exciting spectacles and engrossing experiences, filling his mind with the fanatical enthusiasm requisite to give forceand fire to the delivery of the discourse. He could not possibly havewritten it after coming to the place. He must have brought it in hispocket. It is a thoroughly elaborated and carefully constructedperformance, requiring long and patient application to compose it, andexhausting all the resources of theological research and reference, and of artistic skill and finish. It is adapted to the details of anoccasion which was prepared to meet it. Not only the sermon but theaudience were the result of arrangement carefully made in the stagesof preparation and in the elements comprised in it. The precedingsteps had all been seasonably and appositely taken, so that, when theregular lecture afternoon came, Lawson would have his voluminousdiscourse ready, and a congregation be in waiting to hear it, withminds suitably wrought upon by the preceding incidents of the day, tobe thoroughly and permanently impressed by it. The occasion had beenheralded by a train of circumstances drawing everybody to the spot. The magistrates were already there, some of them by virtue of thenecessity of official presence in the earlier part of the day, andothers came in from the neighborhood; the ministers gathered from thetowns in the vicinity; men and women came from all quarters, flockingalong the highways and the by-ways, large numbers on horseback, andcrowds on foot. Probably the village meeting-house, and the groundsaround it, presented a spectacle such as never was exhibitedelsewhere. Awe, dread, earnestness, a stern but wild fanaticism, werestamped on all countenances, and stirred the heaving multitude to itsdepths, and in all its movements and utterances. It is impossible toimagine a combination of circumstances that could give greateradvantage and power to a speaker, and Lawson was equal to thesituation. No discourse was ever more equal, or better adapted, to itsoccasion. It was irresistible in its power, and carried the publicmind as by storm. 

The text is Zechariah, iii. 2: "And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lordrebuke thee, O Satan! even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem rebukethee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?" After an allusionto the rebellion of Satan, and his fall from heaven with his "accursedlegions, " and after representing them as filled "with envy and maliceagainst all mankind, " seeking "by all ways and means to work theirruin and destruction for ever, opposing to the utmost all persons andthings appointed by the Lord Jesus Christ as means or instruments oftheir comfort here or salvation hereafter, " he proceeds, in the mannerof those days, to open his text and spread out his subject, all alongexhibiting great ability, skill, and power, showing learning in hisillustrations, drawing aptly and abundantly from the Scriptures, and, at the right points, rising to high strains of eloquence in dictionand imagery. 

He describes, at great length and with abundant instances ingeniouslyselected from sacred and profane literature, the marvellous power withwhich Satan is enabled to operate upon mankind. He says, --

 "He is a spirit, and hence strikes at the spiritual part, the most excellent (constituent) part of man. Primarily disturbing and interrupting the animal and vital spirits, he maliciously operates upon the more common powers of the soul by strange and frightful representations to the fancy or imagination; and, by violent tortures of the body, often threatening to extinguish life, as hath been observed in those that are afflicted amongst us. And not only so, but he vents his malice in diabolical operations on the more sublime and distinguishing faculties of the rational soul, raising mists of darkness and ignorance in the understanding.... Sometimes he brings distress upon the bodies of men, by malignant operations in, and diabolical impressions on, the spirituous principle or vehicle of life and motion.... There are certainly some lower operations of Satan (whereof there are sundry examples among us), which the bodies and souls of men and women are liable unto. And whosoever hath carefully observed those things must needs be convinced, that the motions of the persons afflicted, both as to the manner and as to the violence of them, are the mere effects of diabolical malice and operations, and that it cannot rationally be imagined to proceed from any other cause whatever.... Satan exerts his malice mediately by employing some of mankind and other creatures, and he frequently useth other persons or things, that his designs may be the more undiscernible. Thus he used the serpent in the first temptation (Gen. Iii. 1). Hence he contracts and indents with witches and wizards, that they shall be the instruments by whom he may more secretly affect and afflict the bodies and minds of others; and, if he can prevail upon those that make a visible profession, it may be the better covert unto his diabolical enterprise, and may the more readily pervert others to consenting unto his subjection. So far as we can look into those hellish mysteries, and guess at the administration of that kingdom of darkness, we may learn that witches make witches by persuading one the other to subscribe to a book or articles, &c. ; and the Devil, having them in his subjection, by their consent, he will use their bodies and minds, shapes and representations, to affright and afflict others at his pleasure, for the propagation of his infernal kingdom, and accomplishing his devised mischiefs to the souls, bodies, and lives of the children of men, yea, and of the children of God too, so far as permitted and is possible.... He insinuates into the society of the adopted children of God, in their most solemn approaches to him, in sacred ordinances, endeavoring to look so like the true saints and ministers of Christ, that, if it were possible, he would deceive the very elect (Matt. Xxiv. 24) by his subtilty: for it is certain he never works more like the Prince of darkness than when he looks most like an angel of light; and, when he most pretends to holiness, he then doth most secretly, and by consequence most surely, undermine it, and those that most excel in the exercise thereof. "

The following is a specimen of the style in which he stirred up thepeople:--

 "The application of this doctrine to ourselves remains now to be attended. Let it be for solemn warning and awakening to all of us that are before the Lord at this time, and to all others of this whole people, who shall come to the knowledge of these direful operations of Satan, which the holy God hath permitted in the midst of us. 

 "The Lord doth terrible things amongst us, by lengthening the chain of the roaring lion in an extraordinary manner, so that the Devil is come down in great wrath (Rev. Xii. 12), endeavoring to set up his kingdom, and, by racking torments on the bodies, and affrightening representations to the minds of many amongst us, to force and fright them to become his subjects. I may well say, then, in the words of the prophet (Mic. Vi. 9), 'The Lord's voice crieth to the city, ' and to the country also, with an unusual and amazing loudness. Surely, it warns us to awaken out of all sleep, of security or stupidity, to arise, and take our Bibles, turn to, and learn that lesson, not by rote only, but by heart. 1 Pet. V. 8: 'Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the Devil goes about as a roaring lion, seeking whom amongst you he may distress, delude, and devour. '... Awake, awake then, I beseech you, and remain no longer under the dominion of that prince of cruelty and malice, whose tyrannical fury we see thus exerted against the bodies and minds of these afflicted persons!... This warning is directed to all manner of persons, according to their condition of life, both in civil and sacred order; both high and low, rich and poor, old and young, bond and free. Oh, let the observation of these amazing dispensations of God's unusual and strange Providence quicken us to our duty, at such a time as this, in our respective places and stations, relations and capacities! The great God hath done such things amongst us as do make the ears of those that hear them to tingle (Jer. Xix. 3); and serious souls are at a loss to what these things may grow, and what we shall find to be the end of this dreadful visitation, in the permission whereof the provoked God as a lion hath roared, who can but fear? the Lord hath spoken, who can but prophesy? (Amos iii. 8. ) The loud trumpet of God, in this thundering providence, is blown in the city, and the echo of it heard through the country, surely then the people must and ought to be afraid (Amos iii. 6).... You are therefore to be deeply humbled, and sit in the dust, considering the signal hand of God in singling out this place, this poor village, for the first seat of Satan's tyranny, and to make it (as 'twere) the rendezvous of devils, where they muster their infernal forces; appearing to the afflicted as coming armed to carry on their malicious designs against the bodies, and, if God in mercy prevent not, against the souls, of many in this place.... Be humbled also that so many members of this church of the Lord Jesus Christ should be under the influences of Satan's malice in these his operations; some as the objects of his tyranny on their bodies to that degree of distress which none can be sensible of but those that see and feel it, who are in the mean time also sorely distressed in their minds by frightful representations made by the devils unto them. Other professors and visible members of this church are under the awful accusations and imputations of being the instruments of Satan in his mischievous actings. It cannot but be matter of deep humiliation, to such as are innocent, that the righteous and holy God should permit them to be named in such pernicious and unheard-of practices, and not only so, but that he who cannot but do right should suffer the stain of suspected guilt to be, as it were, rubbed on and soaked in by many sore and amazing circumstances. And it is a matter of soul-abasement to all that are in the bond of God's holy covenant in this place, that Satan's seat should be amongst them, where he attempts to set up his kingdom in opposition to Christ's kingdom, and to take some of the visible subjects of our Lord Jesus, and use at least their shapes and appearances, instrumentally, to afflict and torture other visible subjects of the same kingdom. Surely his design is that Christ's kingdom may be divided against itself, that, being thereby weakened, he may the better take opportunity to set up his own accursed powers and dominions. It calls aloud then to all in this place in the name of the blessed Jesus, and words of his holy apostle (1 Peter v. 6), 'Humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God. '

 "It is matter of terror, amazement, and astonishment, to all such wretched souls (if there be any here in the congregation; and God, of his infinite mercy, grant that none of you may ever be found such!) as have given up their names and souls to the Devil; who by covenant, explicit or implicit, have bound themselves to be his slaves and drudges, consenting to be instruments in whose shapes he may torment and afflict their fellow-creatures (even of their own kind) to the amazing and astonishing of the standers-by. I would hope I might have spared this use, but I desire (by divine assistance) to declare the whole counsel of God; and if it come not as conviction where it is so, it may serve for warning, that it may never be so. For it is a most dreadful thing to consider that any should change the service of God for the service of the Devil, the worship of the blessed God for the worship of the cursed enemy of God and man. But, oh! (which is yet a thousand times worse) how shall I name it? if any that are in the visible covenant of God should break that covenant, and make a league with Satan; if any that have sat down and eat at Christ's Table, should so lift up their heel against him as to have fellowship at the table of devils, and (as it hath been represented to some of the afflicted) eat of the bread and drink of the wine that Satan hath mingled. Surely, if this be so, the poet is in the right, "Audax omnia perpeti. Gens humana ruit per vetitum nefas:" audacious mortals are grown to a fearful height of impiety; and we must cry out in Scripture language, and that emphatical apostrophe of the Prophet Jeremy (chap. Ii. 12), 'Be astonished, O ye heavens, at this, and be horribly afraid: be ye very desolate, saith the Lord. '... If you are in covenant with the Devil, the intercession of the blessed Jesus is against you. His prayer is for the subduing of Satan's power and kingdom, and the utter confounding of all his instruments. If it be so, then the great God is set against you. The omnipotent Jehovah, one God in three Persons; Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in their several distinct operations and all their divine attributes, --are engaged against you. Therefore KNOW YE that are guilty of such monstrous iniquity, that He that made you will not save you, and that He that formed you will show you no favor (Isa. Xxvii. 11). Be assured, that, although you should now evade the condemnation of man's judgment, and escape a violent death by the hand of justice; yet, unless God shall give you repentance (which we heartily pray for), there is a day coming when the secrets of all hearts shall be revealed by Jesus Christ (Rom. Ii. 16). Then, then, your sin will find you out; and you shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and doomed to those endless, easeless, and remediless torments prepared for the Devil and his angels (Matt. Xxv. 41).... If you have been guilty of such impiety, the prayers of the people of God are against you on that account. It is their duty to pray daily, that Satan's kingdom may be suppressed, weakened, brought down, and at last totally destroyed; hence that all abettors, subjects, defenders, and promoters thereof, may be utterly crushed and confounded. They are constrained to suppress that kindness and compassion that in their sacred addresses they once bare unto you (as those of their own kind, and framed out of the same mould), praying with one consent, as the royal prophet did against his malicious enemies, the instruments of Satan (Ps. Cix. 6), 'Set thou a wicked man over him, and let Satan stand at his right hand' (i. E. ), to withstand all that is for his good, and promote all that is for his hurt; and (verse 7) 'When he is judged, let him be condemned, and let his prayer become sin. '

 "Be we exhorted and directed to exercise true spiritual sympathy with, and compassion towards, those poor, afflicted persons that are by divine permission under the direful influence of Satan's malice. There is a divine precept enjoining the practice of such duty: Heb. Xiii. 3, 'Remember them that suffer adversity, as being yourselves also in the body. ' Let us, then, be deeply sensible, and, as the elect of God, put on bowels of mercy towards those in misery (Col. Iii. 12). Oh, pity, pity them! for the hand of the Lord hath touched them, and the malice of devils hath fallen upon them. 

 "Let us be sure to take unto us and put on the whole armor of God, and every piece of it; let none be wanting. Let us labor to be in the exercise and practice of the whole company of sanctifying graces and religious duties. This important duty is pressed, and the particular pieces of that armor recited Eph. Vi. 11 and 13 to 18. Satan is representing his infernal forces; and the devils seem to come armed, mustering amongst us. I am this day commanded to call and cry an alarm unto you: ARM, ARM, ARM! handle your arms, see that you are fixed and in a readiness, as faithful soldiers under the Captain of our salvation, that, by the shield of faith, ye and we all may resist the fiery darts of the wicked; and may be faithful unto death in our spiritual warfare; so shall we assuredly receive the crown of life (Rev. Ii. 10). Let us admit no parley, give no quarter: let none of Satan's forces or furies be more vigilant to hurt us than we are to resist and repress them, in the name, and by the spirit, grace, and strength of our Lord Jesus Christ. Let us ply the throne of grace, in the name and merit of our Blessed Mediator, taking all possible opportunities, public, private, and secret, to pour out our supplications to the God of our salvation. Prayer is the most proper and potent antidote against the old Serpent's venomous operations. When legions of devils do come down among us, multitudes of prayers should go up to God. Satan, the worst of all our enemies, is called in Scripture a dragon, to note his malice; a serpent, to note his subtilty; a lion, to note his strength. But none of all these can stand before prayer. The most inveterate malice (as that of Haman) sinks under the prayer of Esther (chap. Iv. 16). The deepest policy (the counsel of Achitophel) withers before the prayer of David (2 Sam. Xv. 31); and the vastest army (an host of a thousand thousand Ethiopians) ran away, like so many cowards, before the prayer of Asa (2 Chron. Xiv. 9 to 15). 

 "What therefore I say unto one I say unto all, in this important case, PRAY, PRAY, PRAY. 

 "To our honored magistrates, here present this day, to inquire into these things, give me leave, much honored, to offer one word to your consideration. Do all that in you lies to check and rebuke Satan; endeavoring, by all ways and means that are according to the rule of God, to discover his instruments in these horrid operations. You are concerned in the civil government of this people, being invested with power by their Sacred Majesties, under this glorious Jesus (the King and Governor of his church), for the supporting of Christ's kingdom against all oppositions of Satan's kingdom and his instruments. Being ordained of God to such a station (Rom. Xiii. 1), we entreat you, bear not the sword in vain, as ver. 4; but approve yourselves a terror of and punishment to evil-doers, and a praise to them that do well (1 Peter ii. 14); ever remembering that ye judge not for men, but for the Lord (2 Chron. Xix. 6); and, as his promise is, so our prayer shall be for you, without ceasing, that he would be with you in the judgment, as he that can and will direct, assist, and reward you. Follow the example of the upright Job (chap. Xxix. 16): Be a father to the poor; to these poor afflicted persons, in pitiful and painful endeavors to help them; and the cause that seems to be so dark, as you know not how to determine it, do your utmost, in the use of all regular means, to search it out. 

 "There is comfort in considering that the Lord Jesus, the Captain of our salvation, hath already overcome the Devil. Christ, that blessed seed of the woman, hath given this cursed old serpent called the Devil and Satan a mortal and incurable bruise on the head (Gen. Iii. 15). He was too much for him in a single conflict (Matt. Iv. ). He opposed his power and kingdom in the possessed. He suffered not the devils to speak, because they knew him (Mark i. 34). He completed his victory by his death on the cross, and destroyed his dominion (Heb. Ii. 14), that through death he might destroy death, and him that had the powers of death, that is the Devil; and by and after his resurrection made show openly unto the world, that he had spoiled principalities and powers, triumphing over them (Col. Ii. 15). Hence, if we are by faith united to him, his victory is an earnest and prelibation of our conquest at last. All Satan's strugglings now are but those of a conquered enemy. It is no small comfort to consider, that Job's exercise of patience had its beginning from the Devil; but we have seen the end to be from the Lord (James v. 11). That we also may find by experience the same blessed issue of our present distresses by Satan's malice, let us repent of every sin that hath been committed, and labor to practise every duty which hath been neglected. Then we shall assuredly and speedily find that the kingly power of our Lord and Saviour shall be magnified, in delivering his poor sheep and lambs out of the jaws and paws of the roaring lion. "

[Illustration: _Eng'd at J. Andrews's by R. Babson. _

WILLIAM STOUGHTON. ]

These extended extracts are given from Lawson's discourse, partly toenable every one to estimate the effect it must have produced, underthe circumstances of the occasion, but mainly because they present aliving picture of the sentiments, notions, modes of thinking andreasoning, and convictions, then prevalent. No description given by aperson looking back from our point of view, not having experienced thedelusions of that age, no matter who might attempt the task, couldadequately paint the scene. The foregoing extracts show better, Ithink, than any documents that have come down to us, how the subjectlay in the minds of men at that time. They bring before us directly, without the intervention of any secondary agency, the thoughts, associations, sentiments, of that generation, in breathing reality. They carry us back to the hour and to the spot. Deodat Lawson risesfrom his unknown grave, comes forth from the impenetrable cloud whichenveloped the closing scenes of his mortal career, and we listen tohis voice, as it spoke to the multitudes that gathered in and aroundthe meeting-house in Salem Village, on Lecture-day, March 24, 1692. Helays bare his whole mind to our immediate inspection. In and throughhim, we behold the mind and heart, the forms of language and thought, the feelings and passions, of the people of that day. We mingle withthe crowd that hang upon his lips; we behold their countenances, discern the passions that glowed upon their features, and enter intothe excitement that moved and tossed them like a tempest. We are thusprepared, as we could be in no other way, to comprehend our story. 

The sermon answered its end. It re-enforced the powers that had beguntheir work. It spread out the whole doctrine of witchcraft in amethodical, elaborate, and most impressive form. It justified andcommended every thing that had been done, and every thing thatremained to be done; every step in the proceedings; every process inthe examinations; every kind of accusation and evidence that had beenadduced; every phase of the popular belief, however wild andmonstrous; every pretension of the afflicted children topreternatural experiences and communications, and every tale ofapparitions of departed spirits and the ghosts of murdered men, women, and children, which, engendered in morbid and maniac imaginations, hadbeen employed to fill him and others with horror, inspire revenge, anddrive on the general delirium. And it fortified every point by the lawand the testimony, by passages and scraps of Scripture, studiously andskilfully culled out, and ingeniously applied. It gave form to whathad been vague, and authority to what had floated in blind andbaseless dreams of fancy. It crystallized the disordered vagaries, that had been seething in turbulent confusion in the public mind, intoa fixed, organized, and permanent shape. 

Its publication was forthwith called for. The manuscript was submittedto Increase and Cotton Mather of the North, James Allen and JohnBailey of the First, Samuel Willard of the Old South, churches inBoston, and Charles Morton of the church in Charlestown. It wasprinted with a strong, unqualified indorsement of approval, signed bythe names severally of these the most eminent divines of the country. The discourse was dedicated to the "worshipful and worthily honoredBartholomew Gedney, John Hathorne, Jonathan Corwin, Esqrs. , togetherwith the reverend Mr. John Higginson, pastor, and Mr. Nicholas Noyes, teacher, of the Church of Christ at Salem, " with a preface, addressedto all his "Christian friends and acquaintance, the inhabitants ofSalem Village. " It was republished in London in 1704, under theimmediate direction of its author. The subject is described as"Christ's Fidelity, the only Shield against Satan's Malignity;" andthe titlepage is enforced by passages of Scripture (Rev. Xii. 12, andRom. Xvi. 20). The interest of the volume is highly increased by anappendix, giving the substance of notes taken by Lawson on the spot, during the examinations and trials. They are invaluable, as proceedingfrom a chief actor in the scenes, who was wholly carried away by thedelusion. They describe, in marvellous colors, the wonderfulmanifestations of diabolical agency in, upon, and through theafflicted children; resembling, in many respects, reports of spiritualcommunications prevalent in our day, although not quite coming up tothem. These statements, and the preface to the discourse, are given inthe Appendix to this volume. In a much briefer form, it was printed byBenjamin Harris, at Boston, in 1692; and soon after by John Dunton, inLondon. 

Before dismissing Mr. Lawson's famous sermon, our attention isdemanded to a remarkable paragraph in it. His strong faculties couldnot be wholly bereft of reason; and he had sense enough left to see, what does not appear to have occurred to others, that there might be are-action in the popular passions, and that some might be called toaccount by an indignant public, if not before a stern tribunal ofjustice, for the course of cruelty and outrage they were pursuing, with so high a hand, against accused persons. He was not entirelysatisfied that the appeal he made in his discourse to the people tosuppress and crush out all vestiges of human feeling, and to stiflecompassion and pity in their breasts, would prevail. He foresaw thatthe friends and families of innocent and murdered victims might oneday call for vengeance; and he attempts to provide, beforehand, adefence that is truly ingenious:--

 "Give no place to the Devil by rash censuring of others, without sufficient grounds, or false accusing any willingly. This is indeed to be like the Devil, who hath the title, [Greek: Diabolos], in the Greek, because he is the calumniator or false accuser. Hence, when we read of such accusers in the latter days, they are, in the original, called [Greek: Diaboloi], _calumniatores_ (2 Tim. Iii. 3). It is a time of temptation amongst you, such as never was before: let me entreat you not to be lavish or severe in reflecting on the malice or envy of your neighbors, by whom any of you have been accused, lest, whilst you falsely charge one another, --viz. , the relations of the afflicted and relations of the accused, --the grand accuser (who loves to fish in troubled waters) should take advantage upon you. Look at sin, the procuring cause; God in justice, the sovereign efficient; and Satan, the enemy, the principal instrument, both in afflicting some and accusing others. And, if innocent persons be suspected, it is to be ascribed to God's pleasure, supremely permitting, and Satan's malice subordinately troubling, by representation of such to the afflicting of others, even of such as have, all the while, we have reason to believe (especially some of them), no kind of ill-will or disrespect unto those that have been complained of by them. This giving place to the Devil avoid; for it will have uncomfortable and pernicious influence upon the affairs of this place, by letting out peace, and bringing in confusion and every evil work, which we heartily pray God, in mercy, to prevent. "

This artifice of statement, speciously covered, --while it outragesevery sentiment of natural justice, and breaks every bond of socialresponsibility, --is found, upon close inspection, to be a shockingimputation against the divine administration. It represents the Deity, under the phrases "sovereign efficient" and "supremely permitting" ina view which affords equal shelter to every other class of criminals, even of the deepest dye, as well as those who were ready and eager tobring upon their neighbors the charge of confederacy with Satan. 

The next Sunday--March 27--was the regular communion-day of thevillage church; and Mr. Parris prepared duly to improve the occasionto advance the movement then so strongly under way, and to deepenstill more the impression made by the events of the week, especiallyby Mr. Lawson's sermon. He accordingly composed an elaborate andeffective discourse of his own; and a scene was arranged to follow theregular service, which could not but produce important results. Anunexpected occurrence--a part not in the programme--took place, whichcreated a sensation for the moment; but it tended, upon the whole, toheighten the public excitement, and, without much disturbing theorder, only precipitated a little the progress of events. 

It may well be supposed, that the congregation assembled that day withminds awfully solemnized, and altogether in a condition to be deeplyaffected by the services. A respectable person always prominentlynoticeable for her devout participation in the worship of thesanctuary, and a member of the church, had, on Monday, after a publicexamination, been committed to prison, and was there in irons, waitingto be tried for her life for the blackest of crimes, --a confederacywith the enemy of the souls of men, the archtraitor and rebel againstthe throne of God. On Thursday, another venerable, and ever beforeconsidered pious, matron of a large and influential family, aparticipant in their worship, and a member of the mother-church, hadbeen consigned to the same fate, to be tried for the same horriblecrime. A little child had been proved to have also joined in theinfernal league. No one could tell to what extent Satan had lengthenedhis chain, or who, whether old or young, were in league with him. Every soul was still alive to the impressions made by Mr. Lawson'sgreat discourse, and by the throngs of excited people, includingmagistrates and ministers, that had been gathered in the village. 

The character and spirit of Mr. Parris's sermon are indicated in aprefatory note in the manuscript, "occasioned by dreadful witchcraftbroke out here a few weeks past; and one member of this church, andanother of Salem, upon public examination by civil authority, vehemently suspected for she-witches. " The running title is, "Christknows how many devils there are in his church, and who they are;" andthe text is John vi. 70, 71, "Jesus answered them, Have not I chosenyou twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot, theson of Simon; for he it was that should betray him, being one of thetwelve. "

Peter Cloyse was born May 27, 1639. He came to Salem from York, inMaine, and was one of the original members of the village church. Heappears to have been a person of the greatest respectability andstrength of character. He married Sarah, sister of Rebecca Nurse, andwidow of Edmund Bridges. She was admitted to the village church, Jan. 12, 1690, being then about forty-eight years of age. It may well besupposed that she and her family were overwhelmed with affliction andhorror by the proceedings against her sister. But, as she and herhusband were both communicants, and it was sacrament-day, it wasthought best for them to summon resolution to attend the service. After much persuasion, she was induced to go. She was a very sensitiveperson, and it must have required a great effort of fortitude. Hermind was undoubtedly much harrowed by the allusions made to the eventsof the week; and, when Mr. Parris announced his text, and opened hisdiscourse in the spirit his language indicates, she could bear it nolonger, but rose, and left the meeting. A fresh wind blowing at thetime caused the door to slam after her. The congregation was probablystartled; but Parris was not long embarrassed by the interruption, and she was attended to in due season. At the close of the service, the following scene occurred. I give it as Parris describes it in hischurch-record book:--

 "After the common auditory was dismissed, and before the church's communion at the Lord's Table, the following testimony against the error of our Sister Mary Sibley, who had given direction to my Indian man in an unwarrantable way to find out witches, was read by the pastor:--

 "It is altogether undeniable that our great and blessed God, for wise and holy ends, hath suffered many persons, in several families, of this little village, to be grievously vexed and tortured in body, and to be deeply tempted, to the endangering of the destruction of their souls; and all these amazing feats (well known to many of us) to be done by witchcraft and diabolical operations. It is also well known, that, when these calamities first began, which was in my own family, the affliction was several weeks before such hellish operations as witchcraft were suspected. Nay, it was not brought forth to any considerable light, until diabolical means were used by the making of a cake by my Indian man, who had his direction from this our sister, Mary Sibley; since which, apparitions have been plenty, and exceeding much mischief hath followed. But, by these means (it seems), the Devil hath been raised amongst us, and his rage is vehement and terrible; and, when he shall be silenced, the Lord only knows. But now that this our sister should be instrumental to such distress is a great grief to myself, and our godly honored and reverend neighbors, who have had the knowledge of it. Nevertheless, I do truly hope and believe, that this our sister doth truly fear the Lord; and I am well satisfied from her, that, what she did, she did it ignorantly, from what she had heard of this nature from other ignorant or worse persons. Yet we are in duty bound to protest against such actions, as being indeed a going to the Devil for help against the Devil: we having no such directions from nature, or God's word, it must therefore be, and is, accounted, by godly Protestants who write or speak of such matters, as diabolical; and therefore calls this our sister to deep humiliation for what she has done, and all of us to be watchful against Satan's wiles and devices. 

 "Therefore, as we, in duty as a church of Christ, are deeply bound to protest against it, as most directly contrary to the gospel, yet, inasmuch as this our sister did it in ignorance as she professeth and we believe, we can continue her in our holy fellowship, upon her serious promise of future better advisedness and caution, and acknowledging that she is indeed sorrowful for her rashness herein. 

 "Brethren, if this be your mind, that this iniquity should be thus borne witness against, manifest it by your usual sign of lifting up your hands. --The brethren voted generally, or universally: none made any exceptions. 

 "Sister Sibley, if you are convinced that you herein did sinfully, and are sorry for it, let us hear it from your own mouth. --She did manifest to satisfaction her error and grief for it. 

 "Brethren, if herein you have received satisfaction, testify it by lifting up your hands. --A general vote passed; no exception made. 

 "NOTE. --25th March, 1692. I discoursed said sister in my study about her grand error aforesaid, and also then read to her what I had written as above to be read to the church; and said Sister Sibley assented to the same with tears and sorrowful confession. "

This proceeding was of more importance than appears, perhaps, at firstview. It was one of Mr. Parris's most skilful moves. The course, pursued by the "afflicted" persons had, thus far, in reference tothose engaged in the prosecutions, been in the right direction. But itwas manifest, after the exhibitions they had given, that they wieldeda fearful power, too fearful to be left without control. They couldcry out upon whomsoever they pleased; and against their accusations, armed as they were with the power to fix the charge of guilt upon anyone by giving ocular demonstration that he or she was the author oftheir sufferings, there could be no defence. They might turn, at anymoment, and cry out upon Parris or Lawson, or either or both of thedeacons. Nothing could withstand the evidence of their fits, convulsions, and tortures. It was necessary to have and keep themunder safe control, and, to this end, to prevent any outsiders, or anyinjudicious or intermeddling people, from holding intimacy with them. Parris saw this, and, with his characteristic boldness of action andfertility of resources, at once put a stop to all trouble, and closedthe door against danger, from this quarter. 

Samuel Sibley was a member of the church, and a near neighbor of Mr. Parris. He was about thirty-six years of age. His wife Mary wasthirty-two years of age, and also a member of the church. They werepersons of respectable standing and good repute. Nothing is known toher disadvantage, but her foolish connection with the mysticaloperations going on in Mr. Parris's family; and of this she washeartily ashamed. Her penitent sensibility is quite touchinglydescribed by Mr. Parris. It is true that what she had done was atrifle in comparison with what was going on every day in the familiesof Mr. Parris and Thomas Putnam: but she had acted "rashly, " without"advisedness" from the right quarter, under the lead of "ignorantpersons;" and therefore it was necessary to make a great ado about it, and hold her up as a warning to prevent other persons from meddling insuch matters. Her husband was an uncle of Mary Walcot, one of theafflicted children; and it was particularly important to keep theirrelatives, and members of their immediate families, from taking anypart or action in connection with them, except under due"advisedness, " and the direction of persons learned in such deepmatters. The family connections of the Sibleys were extensive, and ablow struck at that point would be felt everywhere. The procedure wasundoubtedly effectual. After Mary Sibley had been thus awfully rebukedand distressingly exposed for dealing with "John Indian, " it is notlikely that any one else ever ventured to intermeddle with the"afflicted, " or have any connection, except as outside spectators, with the marvellous phenomena of "diabolical operations. " It will benoticed, that, while Mr. Parris thus waved the sword of disciplinaryvengeance against any who should dare to intrude upon the forbiddenground, he occupied it himself without disguise, and maintained hishold upon it. He asserts the reality of the "amazing feats" practisedby diabolical power in their midst, and enforces in the strongestlanguage the then prevalent views and pending proceedings. 

The operations of the week, including the solemn censure of MarySibley, had all worked favorably for the prosecutors and managers ofthe business. The magistrates, ministers, and whole body of thepeople, had become committed; the accusing girls had proved themselvesapt and competent to their work; the public reason was prostrated, andnatural sensibility stunned. All resisting forces were powerless, andall collateral dangers avoided and provided against. The movement wasfully in hand. The next step was maturely considered, and, as we shallsee, skilfully taken. 

It is to be observed, that there was, at this time, a break in theregular government of Massachusetts. In the spring of 1689, the peoplehad risen, seized the royal governor, Sir Edmund Andros, and put himin prison. They summoned their old charter governor, Simon Bradstreet, then living in Salem, eighty-seven years of age, to the chair ofstate; called the assistants of 1686 back to their seats, who providedfor an election of representatives by the people of the towns; and thegovernment thus created conducted affairs until the arrival of SirWilliam Phipps, in May, 1692, when Massachusetts ceased to be acolony, and was thenceforth, until 1774, a royal province. Duringthese three years, from May, 1689, to May, 1692, the government wasbased upon an uprising of the people. It was a period of pure andabsolute independence of the crown or parliament of England. AlthoughBradstreet's faculties were unimpaired and his spirit true and firm, his age prevented his doing much more than to give his loved andvenerated name to the daring movement, and to the official service, ofthe people. The executive functions were, for the most part, exercisedby the deputy-governor, Thomas Danforth, who was a person of greatability and public spirit. Unfortunately, at this time he waszealously in favor of the witchcraft prosecutions. Bradstreet wasthroughout opposed to them. Had time held off its hand, and hisphysical energies not been impaired, he would undoubtedly haveresisted and prevented them. Danforth, it is said by Brattle, came todisapprove of them finally: but he began them by arrests in othertowns, months before any thing of the kind was thought of in SalemVillage; and he contributed, prominently, to give destructive andwide-spread power, in an early stage of its development, to thewitchcraft delusion here. 

After the lapse of a week, preparations were completed to renewoperations, and a higher and more commanding character given to them. On Monday, April 4, Captain Jonathan Walcot and Lieutenant NathanielIngersoll went to the town, and, "for themselves and several of theirneighbors, " exhibited to the assistants residing there, John Hathorneand Jonathan Corwin, complaints against "Sarah Cloyse, the wife ofPeter Cloyse of Salem Village, and Elizabeth Procter of Salem Farms, for high suspicion of sundry acts of witchcraft. " There the plan ofproceedings in reference to the above-said parties was agreed upon. Itwas the result of consultation; communications probably passing withthe deputy-governor in Boston, or at his residence in Cambridge. Onthe 8th of April, warrants were duly issued, ordering the marshal tobring in the prisoners "on Monday morning next, being the eleventh dayof this instant April, about eleven of the clock, in the publicmeeting-house in the town. " It had been arranged, that the examinationshould not be, as before, in the ordinary way, before the two localmagistrates, but, in an extraordinary way, before the highest tribunalin the colony, or a representation of it. For a preliminary hearing, with a view merely to commitment for trial, this surely may justly becharacterized as an extraordinary, wholly irregular, and, in allpoints of view, reprehensible procedure. When the day came, themeeting-house, which was much more capacious than that at the village, was crowded; and the old town filled with excited throngs. Uponopening proceedings, lo and behold, instead of the two magistrates, the government of the colony was present, in the highest character itthen had as "a council"! The record says, --

 "Salem, April 11, 1692. --At a Council held at Salem, and present Thomas Danforth, Esq. , deputy-governor; James Russell, John Hathorne, Isaac Addington, Major Samuel Appleton, Captain Samuel Sewall, Jonathan Corwin, Esquires. "

Russell was of Charlestown, Addington and Sewall of Boston, andAppleton of Ipswich. Mr. Parris, "being desired and appointed to writethe examination, did take the same, and also read it before thecouncil in public. " This document has not come down to us; butHutchinson had access to it, and the substance of it is preserved inhis "History of Massachusetts. "

The marshal (Herrick) brought in Sarah Cloyse and Elizabeth Procter, and delivered them "before the honorable council:" and the examinationwas begun. 

The deputy-governor first called to the stand John Indian, and pliedhim, as was the course pursued on all these occasions, with leadingquestions:--

 "John, who hurt you?--Goody Procter first, and then Goody Cloyse. 

 "What did she do to you?--She brought the book to me. 

 "John, tell the truth: who hurts you? Have you been hurt?--The first was a gentlewoman I saw. 

 "Who next?--Goody Cloyse. 

 "But who hurt you next?--Goody Procter. 

 "What did she do to you?--She choked me, and brought the book. 

 "How oft did she come to torment you?--A good many times, she and Goody Cloyse. 

 "Do they come to you in the night, as well as the day?--They come most in the day. 

 "Who?--Goody Cloyse and Goody Procter. 

 "Where did she take hold of you?--Upon my throat, to stop my breath. 

 "Do you know Goody Cloyse and Goody Procter?--Yes: here is Goody Cloyse. "

We may well suppose that these two respectable women must have beenfilled with indignation, shocked, and amazed at the statements made bythe Indian, following the leading interrogatories of the Court. SarahCloyse broke out, "When did I hurt thee?" He answered, "A great manytimes. " She exclaimed, "Oh, you are a grievous liar!" The Courtproceeded with their questions:--

 "What did this Goody Cloyse do to you?--She pinched and bit me till the blood came. 

 "How long since this woman came and hurt you?--Yesterday, at meeting. 

 "At any time before?--Yes: a great many times. "

Having drawn out John Indian, the Court turned to the other afflictedones:--

 "Mary Walcot, who hurts you?--Goody Cloyse. 

 "What did she do to you?--She hurt me. 

 "Did she bring the book?--Yes. 

 "What was you to do with it?--To touch it, and be well. 

 "(Then she fell into a fit. )"

This put a stop to the examination for a time; but it was generallyquite easy to bring witnesses out of a fit, and restore entirecalmness of mind. All that was necessary was to lift them up, andcarry them to the accused person, the touch of any part of whose bodywould, in an instant, relieve the sufferer. This having been done, theexamination proceeded:--

 "Doth she come alone?--Sometimes alone, and sometimes in company with Goody Nurse and Goody Corey, and a great many I do not know. 

 "(Then she fell into a fit again. )"

She was, probably, restored in the same way as before; but, her partbeing finished for that stage of the proceeding, another of theafflicted children took the stand:--

 "Abigail Williams, did you see a company at Mr. Parris's house eat and drink?--Yes, sir: that was in the sacrament. "

I would call attention to the form of the foregoing questions. Hutchinson says that "Mr. Parris was over-officious: most of theexaminations, although in the presence of one or more magistrates, were taken by him. " He put the questions. They show, on this occasion, a minute knowledge beforehand of what the witnesses are to say, whichit cannot be supposed Danforth, Russell, Addington, Appleton, andSewall, strangers, as they were, to the place and the details of theaffair, could have had. The examination proceeded:--

 "How many were there?--About forty, and Goody Cloyse and Goody Good were their deacons. 

 "What was it?--They said it was our blood, and they had it twice that day. "

The interrogator again turned to Mary Walcot, and inquired, --

 "Have you seen a white man?--Yes, sir: a great many times. 

 "What sort of a man was he?--A fine grave man; and, when he came, he made all the witches to tremble. 

 "(Abigail Williams confirmed the same, and that they had such a sight at Deacon Ingersoll's. )

 "Who was at Deacon Ingersoll's then?--Goody Cloyse, Goody Nurse, Goody Corey, and Goody Good. 

 "(Then Sarah Cloyse asked for water, and sat down, as one seized with a dying, fainting fit; and several of the afflicted fell into fits, and some of them cried out, 'Oh! her spirit has gone to prison to her sister Nurse. ')"

The audacious lying of the witnesses; the horrid monstrousness oftheir charges against Sarah Cloyse, of having bitten the flesh of theIndian brute, and drank herself and distributed to others, as deacon, at an infernal sacrament, the blood of the wicked creatures makingthese foul and devilish declarations, known by her to be utterly andwickedly false; and the fact that they were believed by the deputy, the council, and the assembly, --were more than she could bear. Hersoul sickened at such unimaginable depravity and wrong; her nervoussystem gave way; she fainted, and sunk to the floor. The manner inwhich the girls turned the incident against her shows how they werehardened to all human feeling, and the cunning art which, on alloccasions, characterized their proceedings. That such an insolentinterruption and disturbance, on their part, was permitted, withoutrebuke from the Court, is a perpetual dishonor to every member of it. The scene exhibited at this moment, in the meeting-house, is worthy ofan attempt to imagine. The most terrible sensation was naturallyproduced, by the swooning of the prisoner, the loudly uttered andsavage mockery of the girls, and their going simultaneously into fits, screaming at the top of their voices, twisting into all possibleattitudes, stiffened as in death, or gasping with convulsive spasms ofagony, and crying out, at intervals, "There is the black manwhispering in Cloyse's ear, " "There is a yellow-bird flying round herhead. " John Indian, on such occasions, used to confine hisachievements to tumbling, and rolling his ugly body about the floor. The deepest commiseration was felt by all for the "afflicted, " and menand women rushed to hold and soothe them. There was, no doubt, muchloud screeching, and some miscellaneous faintings, through the wholecrowd. At length, by bringing the sufferers into contact with GoodyCloyse, the diabolical fluid passed back into her, they were allrelieved, and the examination was resumed. Elizabeth Procter was nowbrought forward. 

In the account given, in the First Part, of the population of SalemVillage and the contiguous farms, her husband, John Procter, wasintroduced to our acquaintance. From what we then saw of him, we arewell assured that he would not shrink from the protection and defenceof his wife. He accompanied her from her arrest to her arraignment, and stood by her side, a strong, brave, and resolute guardian, tryingto support her under the terrible trials of her situation, and readyto comfort and aid her to the extent of his power, disregardful of allconsequences to himself. The examination proceeded:--

 "Elizabeth Procter, you understand whereof you are charged; viz. , to be guilty of sundry acts of witchcraft. What say you to it? Speak the truth; and so you that are afflicted, you must speak the truth, as you will answer it before God another day. Mary Walcot, doth this woman hurt you?--I never saw her so as to be hurt by her. 

 "Mercy Lewis, does she hurt you?

 "(Her mouth was stopped. )

 "Ann Putnam, does she hurt you?

 "(She could not speak. )

 "Abigail Williams, does she hurt you?

 "(Her hand was thrust in her own mouth. )

 "John, does she hurt you?--This is the woman that came in her shift, and choked me. 

 "Did she ever bring the book?--Yes, sir. 

 "What to do?--To write. 

 "What? this woman?--Yes, sir. 

 "Are you sure of it?--Yes, sir. 

 "(Again Abigail Williams and Ann Putnam were spoke to by the Court; but neither of them could make any answer, by reason of dumbness or other fits. )

 "What do you say, Goody Procter, to these things?--I take God in heaven to be my witness, that I know nothing of it, no more than the child unborn. 

 "Ann Putnam, doth this woman hurt you?--Yes, sir: a great many times. 

 "(Then the accused looked upon them, and they fell into fits. )

 "She does not bring the book to you, does she?--Yes, sir, often; and saith she hath made her maid set her hand to it. 

 "Abigail Williams, does this woman hurt you?--Yes, sir, often. 

 "Does she bring the book to you?--Yes. 

 "What would she have you do with it?--To write in it, and I shall be well. "

Turning to the accused, Abigail said, "Did not you tell me that yourmaid had written?" Goody Procter seems to have been utterly amazed atthe conduct and charges of the girls. She knew, of course, that whatthey said was false; but perhaps she thought them crazy, and thereforeobjects of pity and compassion, and felt disposed to treat themkindly, and see whether they could not be recalled to their senses, and restored to their better nature: for Parris, in his account, saysthat at this point she answered the question thus put to her byAbigail thus: "Dear child, it is not so. There is another judgment, dear child. " But kindness was thrown away upon them; for Parris saysthat immediately "Abigail and Ann had fits. " After coming out of them, "they cried out, 'Look you! there is Goody Procter upon the beam. '"Instantly, as we may well suppose, the whole audience looked wherethey pointed. Their manner gave assurance that they saw her "on thebeam, " among the rafters of the meeting-house; but she was invisibleto all other eyes. The people, no doubt, were filled with amazement atsuch supernaturalism. But John Procter, her husband, did not believe aword of it: and it is not to be doubted that he expressed hisindignation at the nonsense and the outrage in his usual bold, strong, and unguarded language, which brought down the vengeance of the girlsat once on his own head; for Parris, in his report, goes on to say:--

 "(By and by, both of them cried out of Goodman Procter himself, and said he was a wizard. Immediately, many if not all of the bewitched had grievous fits. )

 "Ann Putnam, who hurt you?--Goodman Procter, and his wife too. 

 "(Afterwards, some of the afflicted cried, 'There is Procter going to take up Mrs. Pope's feet!' and her feet were immediately taken up. )

 "What do you say, Goodman Procter, to these things?--I know not. I am innocent. 

 "(Abigail Williams cried out, 'There is Goodman Procter going to Mrs. Pope!' and immediately said Pope fell into a fit. )"

At this point, the deputy, or some member of the Court interposed, ifI interpret rightly Parris's report, which is here obscurelyexpressed, inasmuch as he does not say who spoke; but the import ofthe words indicates that they proceeded from some member of the Court, who was perfectly deceived:--

 "You see, the Devil will deceive you: the children could see what you was going to do before the woman was hurt. I would advise you to repentance, for the Devil is bringing you out. 

 "(Abigail Williams cried out again, 'There is Goodman Procter going to hurt Goody Bibber!' and immediately Goody Bibber fell into a fit. There was the like of Mary Walcot, and divers others. Benjamin Gould gave in his testimony, that he had seen Goodman Corey and his wife, Procter and his wife, Goody Cloyse, Goody Nurse, and Goody Griggs in his chamber last Thursday night. Elizabeth Hubbard was in a trance during the whole examination. During the examination of Elizabeth Procter, Abigail Williams and Ann Putnam both made offer to strike at said Procter; but, when Abigail's hand came near, it opened, --whereas it was made up into a fist before, --and came down exceeding lightly as it drew near to said Procter, and at length, with open and extended fingers, touched Procter's hood very lightly. Immediately, Abigail cried out, her fingers, her fingers, her fingers burned; and Ann Putnam took on most grievously of her head, and sunk down. )"

Hutchinson, after giving Parris's account of this examination, expresses himself thus: "No wonder the whole country was in aconsternation, when persons of sober lives and unblemished characterswere committed to prison upon such sort of evidence. Nobody was safe. "All things considered, it may perhaps be said, that, filled as thewitchcraft proceedings were throughout with folly and outrage, therewas nothing worse than this examination, conducted by thedeputy-governor and council, on the 11th of April, 1692, in the greatmeeting-house of the First Church in Salem. It must have been a sceneof the wildest disorder, particularly in the latter part of it. Nowonder that the people in general were deluded, when the most learnedcouncillors of the colony countenanced, participated in, and gaveeffect to, such disorderly procedures in a house of worship, in thepresence of a high judicial tribunal, and of the then supremegovernment of the colony!

Benjamin Gould gave his volunteer testimony without "advisedness, " andquite incontinently. He brought out Goodman Corey before the managerswere quite ready to fall upon him; and he antedated, by a considerablelength of time, any such imputation upon Goody Griggs. It was well forElizabeth Hubbard to have been in a trance, so that she could not hearthe mention of her aunt's name. The council seems to have adjourned tothe next day, at the same place, when Mr. Parris "gave furtherinformation against said John Procter, " which, unfortunately, has notcome down to us. The result was, that Sarah Cloyse, John Procter, andElizabeth his wife, were all committed for trial, and, with RebeccaNurse, Martha Corey, and Dorcas Good, were sent to the jail in Boston, in the custody of Marshal Herrick. 

The proceedings of the 11th and 12th of April produced a great effectin driving on the general infatuation. Judge Sewall, who was presentas one of the council, in his diary at this date, says, "Went toSalem, where, in the meeting-house, the persons accused of witchcraftwere examined; was a very great assembly; 'twas awful to see how theafflicted persons were agitated. " In the margin is written, apparently some time afterwards, the interjection "_Væ!_" thricerepeated, --"Alas, alas, alas!" What perfectly deluded him andDanforth, and everybody else, were the exhibitions made by the"afflicted children. " This is the grand phenomenon of the witchcraftproceedings here in 1692. It, and it alone, carried them through. Those girls, by long practice in "the circle, " and day by day, beforeastonished and wondering neighbors gathered to witness theirdistresses, and especially on the more public occasions of theexaminations, had acquired consummate boldness and tact. In simulationof passions, sufferings, and physical affections; in sleight of hand, and in the management of voice and feature and attitude, --nonecromancers have surpassed them. There has seldom been better actingin a theatre than they displayed in the presence of the astonished andhorror-stricken rulers, magistrates, ministers, judges, jurors, spectators, and prisoners. No one seems to have dreamed that theiractings and sufferings could have been the result of cunning orimposture. Deodat Lawson was a man of talents, had seen much of theworld, and was by no means a simpleton, recluse, or novice; but he waswholly deluded by them. The prisoners, although conscious of their owninnocence, were utterly confounded by the acting of the girls. Theaustere principles of that generation forbade, with the utmostseverity, all theatrical shows and performances. But at Salem Villageand the old town, in the respective meeting-houses, and at DeaconNathaniel Ingersoll's, some of the best playing ever got up in thiscountry was practised; and patronized, for weeks and months, at thevery centre and heart of Puritanism, by "the most straitest sect" ofthat solemn order of men. Pastors, deacons, church-members, doctors ofdivinity, college professors, officers of state, crowded, day afterday, to behold feats which have never been surpassed on the boards ofany theatre; which rivalled the most memorable achievements ofpantomimists, thaumaturgists, and stage-players; and made considerableapproaches towards the best performances of ancient sorcerers andmagicians, or modern jugglers and mesmerizers. 

The meeting of the council at Salem, on the 11th of April, 1692, changed in one sense the whole character of the transaction. Before, it had been a Salem affair. After this, it was a Massachusetts affair. The colonial government at Boston had obtruded itself upon the ground, and, of its own will and seeking, irregularly, and without call orjustification, had taken the whole thing out of the hands of the localauthorities into its own management. Neither the town nor the villageof Salem is responsible, as a principal actor, for what subsequentlytook place. To that meeting of the deputy-governor and his associatesin the colonial administration, at an early period of the transaction, the calamities, outrages, and shame that followed must in justice beascribed. Had it not taken place, the delusion, as in former instancesand other places here and in the mother-country, would have remainedwithin its original local limits, and soon disappeared. That meeting, and the proceedings then had, gave to the fanaticism the momentum thatdrove it on, and extended its destructive influence far and wide. 

The next step in the proceedings is one of the most remarkablefeatures in the case. It is, in some points of view, more suggestiveof suspicion, that there was, behind the whole, a skilful and cunningmanagement, ingeniously contriving schemes to mislead the public mind, than almost any other part of the transaction. Mary Warren, as hasbeen said, was a servant in the family of John Procter. She was amember of the "circle" that had so long met at Mr. Parris's house orThomas Putnam's. She was a constant attendant at its meetings, and aleading spirit among the girls. She did not take an open part againsther master or mistress at their examination, although she acted withavidity and malignity against them as an accusing witness at theirtrials, two months afterwards. It is to be noticed, that Ann Putnamand Abigail Williams, at the examination of Elizabeth Procter, April11, accused her of having induced or compelled "her maid to set herhand to the book. "

On the 18th of April, warrants were got out against Giles Corey andMary Warren, both of Salem Farms; Abigail Hobbs, daughter of WilliamHobbs, of Topsfield; and Bridget Bishop, wife of Edward Bishop, ofSalem, --to be brought in the next forenoon, at about eight o'clock, atthe house of Lieutenant Nathaniel Ingersoll, of Salem Village. HowMary Warren became transformed from an accuser to an accused, from anafflicted person to an afflicter, is the question. It is not easy tofathom the conduct of these girls. They appear to have acted upon aplan deliberately formed, and to have had an understanding with eachother. At the same time, occasionally, they had or pretended to have afalling-out, and came into contradiction. This was perhaps a mereblind, to prevent the suspicion of collusion. The accounts given ofMary Warren seem to render it quite certain that she acted withdeliberate cunning, and was a guilty conspirator with the otheraccusers in carrying on the plot from the beginning. No doubt, itfrequently occurred to those concerned in it, that suspicions mightpossibly get into currency that they were acting a part in concert. Itwas necessary, by all means, to guard against such an idea. This maybe the key to interpret the arrest and proceedings against MaryWarren. If it is, the affair, it must be confessed, was managed withgreat shrewdness and skill. She conducted the stratagem mostdexterously. All at once she fell away from the circle, and began totalk against the "afflicted children, " and went so far as to say, thatthey "did but dissemble. " Immediately, they cried out upon her, charged her with witchcraft, and had her apprehended. After beingcarried to prison, she spoke in strong language against theproceedings. Four persons of unquestionable truthfulness, in prisonwith her, on the same charge, prepared a deposition to this effect:"We heard Mary Warren several times say that the magistrates might aswell examine Keysar's daughter that had been distracted many years, and take notice of what she said, as well as any of the afflictedpersons. 'For, ' said Mary Warren, 'when I was afflicted, I thought Isaw the apparitions of a hundred persons;' for she said her head wasdistempered that she could not tell what she said. And the said Marytold us, that, when she was well again, she could not say that she sawany of the apparitions at the time aforesaid. " I will now give thesubstance of her examination, which commenced on the 19th of April. Mr. Parris was, as usual, requested to take minutes of theproceedings, which have been preserved:--

 "_Examination of Mary Warren, at a Court held at Salem Village, by John Hathorne and Jonathan Corwin, Esqrs. _

 "(As soon as she was coming towards the bar, the afflicted fell into fits. )

 "Mary Warren, you stand here charged with sundry acts of witchcraft. What do you say for yourself? Are you guilty or not?--I am innocent. 

 "Hath she hurt you? (Speaking to the sufferers. )

 "(Some were dumb. Betty Hubbard testified against her, and then said Hubbard fell into a violent fit. )

 "You were, a little while ago, an afflicted person; now you are an afflicter. How comes this to pass?--I look up to God, and take it to be a great mercy of God. 

 "What! do you take it to be a great mercy to afflict others?

 "(Now they were all but John Indian grievously afflicted, and Mrs. Pope also, who was not afflicted before hitherto this day; and, after a few moments, John Indian fell into a violent fit also. )"

"Well, here" (Mr. Parris, the reporter, goes on to say) "was one thatjust now was a tormenter in her apparition, and she owns that she hadmade a league with the Devil. " The marvel was, that, having beforebeen a sufferer, as one of the afflicted accusers, she had then, atthat moment, appeared in the opposite character, and owned herself tohave become a confederate with the Evil One. Having established thisconviction in the minds of the magistrates and spectators, the pointwas reached at which she completed the delusion by appearing to breakaway from her bondage to Satan, assume the functions of a confessingand abjuring witch, and retake her place, with tenfold effect, amongthe accusing witnesses. The manner in which she rescued herself fromthe power of Satan exhibits a specimen of acting seldom surpassed. Theaccount proceeds thus:--

 "Now Mary Warren fell into a fit, and some of the afflicted cried out that she was going to confess; but Goody Corey, and Procter and his wife, came in, _in their apparition_, and struck her down, and said she should tell nothing. "

What is given here in _Italics_, as an "_apparition_, " was of coursebased upon the declarations of the accusing witnesses. It was an artthey often practised in offering their testimony. They would cry out, that the Devil, generally in the shape of a black man, appeared tothem at the time, whispering in the ear of the accused, or sitting onthe beams of the meeting-house in which the examinations weregenerally conducted. On this occasion, they declared that three of thepersons, then in jail in some other place, came in their apparitions, forbade Mary Warren's confession, and struck her down. To give fulleffect to their statement, she went through the process of tumblingdown. Although nothing was seen by any other person present, thedeception was perfect. The Rev. Mr. Parris wrote it all down as havingactually occurred. His record of the transaction goes on as follows:--

 "Mary Warren continued a good space in a fit, that she did neither see nor hear nor speak. 

 "Afterwards she started up, and said, 'I will speak, ' and cried out, 'Oh, I am sorry for it, I am sorry for it!' and wringed her hands, and fell a little while into a fit again, and then came to speak, but immediately her teeth were set; and then she fell into a violent fit, and cried out, 'O Lord, help me! O good Lord, save me!'

 "And then afterwards cried again, 'I will tell, I will tell!' and then fell into a dead fit again. 

 "And afterwards cried, 'I will tell, they did, they did, they did;' and then fell into a violent fit again. 

 "After a little recovery, she cried, 'I will tell, I will tell. They brought me to it;' and then fell into a fit again, which fits continuing, she was ordered to be led out, and the next to be brought in, viz. , Bridget Bishop. 

 "Some time afterwards, she was called in again, but immediately taken with fits for a while. 

 "'Have you signed the Devil's book?--No. '

 "'Have you not touched it?--No. '

 "Then she fell into fits again, and was sent forth for air. 

 "After a considerable space of time, she was brought in again, but could not give account of things by reason of fits, and so sent forth. 

 "Mary Warren called in afterwards in private, before magistrates and ministers. 

 "She said, 'I shall not speak a word: but I will, I will speak, Satan! She saith she will kill me. Oh! she saith she owes me a spite, and will claw me off. Avoid Satan, for the name of God, avoid!' and then fell into fits again, and cried, 'Will ye? I will prevent ye, in the name of God. '"

The magistrate inquired earnestly:--

 "'Tell us how far have you yielded?'

 "A fit interrupts her again. 

 "'What did they say you should do, and you should be well?'

 "Then her lips were bit, so that she could not speak: so she was sent away. "

Mr. Parris, the reporter of the case, adds:--

 "Note that not one of the sufferers was afflicted during her examination, after once she began to confess, though they were tormented before. "

She was subsequently examined in the prison several times, fallingoccasionally into fits, and exhibiting the appearance of along-continued conflict with Satan, who was supposed to be resistingher inclination to confess, and holding her with violence to thecontract she had made with him. The magistrates and ministers beheldwith amazement and awe what they believed to be precisely a similarscene to that described by the evangelists when the Devil stroveagainst the power of the Saviour and his disciples, and would not quithis hold upon the young man, but "threw him down, and tare him. " Atlength, as in that case, Satan was overcome. After a protracted, mostviolent, and terrible contest, Mary Warren got released from hisclutches, and made a full and circumstantial confession. 

Whoever studies carefully the account of Mary Warren's successiveexaminations can hardly question, I think, that she acted a part, andacted it with wonderful cunning, skill, and effect. 

This examination, beginning on Tuesday, the 19th of April, continuedafter she was committed to prison in Salem, at the jail there, forseveral days, and was renewed at intervals until the middle of May. After she had thoroughly broken away from Satan, she revealed all thatshe had seen and heard while associating with him and his confederatesubjects: her testimony was implicitly received, and it dealt deathand destruction in all directions. It is a circumstance stronglyconfirming this view, that Mary Warren was soon released fromconfinement. It was the general practice to keep those, who confessed, in prison, to retain in that way power over them, and prevent theirrecanting their confessions. She is found, by the papers on file, tohave acted afterwards, as a capital witness, against ten persons, allof whom were convicted, and seven executed. Besides these, shetestified, with the appearance of animosity and vindictiveness, against her master John Procter, and her mistress his wife; thuscontributing to secure the conviction of both, and the death of theformer. In how many more cases she figured in the same character andto the same effect is unknown, as the papers in reference to only avery small proportion of them have come down to us. The interpretationI give to the course of Mary Warren exhibits her guilt, and that ofthose participating in the stratagem, as of the deepest and blackestdye. But it seems to be the only one which a scrutiny of the detailsof her examinations, and of the facts of the case, allows us toreceive. The effect was most decisive. The course of the accusingchildren in crying out against one of their own number satisfied thepublic, and convinced still more the magistrates, that they weretruthful, honest, and upright. They had before given evidence thatthey paid no regard to family influence or eminent reputation. Theyhad now proved that they had no partiality and no favoritism, but wereequally ready to bring to light and to justice any of their own circlewho might fall into the snare of the Evil One, and become confederatewith him. No dramatic artist, no cunning impostor, ever contrived amore ingenious plot; and no actors ever carried one out better thanMary Warren and the afflicted children. 

Giles Corey incurred hostility, perhaps, because his depositionrelating to his wife did not come up to the mark required. It is alsohighly probable, that, though incensed at her conduct at the time, reflection had brought him to his senses; and that the circumstancesof her examination and commitment to prison produced a re-action inhis mind. If so, he would have been apt to express himself veryfreely. His examination took place April 19th, in the meeting-house atthe Village. The girls acted their usual part, charging him, one byone, with having afflicted them, and proving it on the spot bytortures and sufferings. After they had severally got through, theyall joined at once in their demonstrations. The report made by Parrissays, "All the afflicted were seized now with fits, and troubled withpinches. Then the Court ordered his hands to be tied. " The magistrateslost all control of themselves, and flew into a passion, exclaiming, "What! is it not enough to act witchcraft at other times, but must youdo it now, in face of authority?" He seems to have been profoundlyaffected by the marvellousness of the accusations, and the exhibitionof what to him was inexplicable in the sufferings of the girls; andall he could say was, "I am a poor creature, and cannot helpit. "--"Upon the motion of his head again, they had their heads andnecks afflicted. " The magistrates, not having recovered theircomposure, continued to pour their wrath upon him, "Why do you tellsuch wicked lies against witnesses?"--"One of his hands was let go, and several were afflicted. He held his head on one side, and thenthe heads of several of the afflicted were held on one side. He drewin his cheeks, and the cheeks of some of the afflicted were suckedin. " Goody Bibber was on hand, and played her accompaniment. She alsouttered malignant charges against him, and "was suddenly seized with aviolent fit. " One of Bibber's statements was that he had called herhusband "damned devilish rogue. " Through all this outrage, Corey wasfirm in asserting his innocence. His language and manner were serious, and solemnized by a sense of the helplessness of his situation and thewicked falsehoods heaped upon him. His disagreement with his wifeabout the witchcraft proceedings being well known, the accusersendeavored to make it out that they had often quarrelled. But heinsisted that the only difference which had before existed betweenthem was a conflict of opinion on one point. In his family devotions, he used this expression, "living to God and dying to sin. " She "foundfault" with the language, and criticised it. He thought it was allright! The characteristic spirit of the old man was roused moststrikingly by one of the charges. Bibber and others testified thatCorey had said he had seen the Devil in the shape of a black hog andwas very much frightened. He could not stand under the imputation ofcowardice, and lost sight of every other element in the accusation butthat. The magistrate asked, "What did you see in the cow-house? Why doyou deny it?"--"I saw nothing but my cattle. "--"(Divers witnessed thathe told them he was frighted. )"--"Well, what do you say to thesewitnesses? What was it frighted you?"--"I do not know that ever Ispoke the word in my life. "

But while his character retained its manliness, and his soul was trulyinsensible to fear, he was very much oppressed and distressed by hissituation. The share he had, with two of his sons-in-law, in bringinghis wife into her awful condition, and in driving on the publicinfatuation at the beginning, was more than he could endure to thinkof, and he was charged with having meditated suicide. Perhaps he hadalready formed the purpose afterwards carried into effect, and mayhave dropped expressions, under that thought, which to others mightappear to indicate a design of self-destruction. He was accused ofhaving said that "he would make away with himself, and charge hisdeath upon his son. " His sons-in-law, Crosby and Parker, were actingwith the crowd that were pursuing him to his death. Little did itenter the imagination of any one then, that there was a method bywhich he could "make away with himself, " leaving the entire act of thedestruction of his life upon his persecutors, and the sin to beapportioned between him and them by the All-wise and All-just. 

Abigail Hobbs had been a reckless vagrant creature, wandering throughthe woods at night like a half-deranged person; but she had wit enoughto see that there was safety in confession. She pretended to havecommitted, by witchcraft, crimes enough to have hanged her a dozentimes. If she had stood to her confession, we should have heard of herno more. 

Bridget Bishop's examination filled the intervals of time while MaryWarren was being carried out of the meeting-house to recover from herfits. Both Parris and Ezekiel Cheever took minutes of it, from whichthe substance is gathered as follows:--

On her coming in, the afflicted persons, at the same moment, severallyfell into fits, and were dreadfully tormented. Hathorne addressed her, calling upon her to give an account of the witchcrafts she was"conversant in. " She replied, "I take all this people to witness thatI am clear. " He then asked the children, "Hath this woman hurt you?"They all cried out that she had. The magistrate continued, "You arehere accused by four or five: what do you say to it?"--"I never sawthese persons before, nor I never[A] was in this place before. I neverdid hurt them in my life. "

[Footnote A: The double negative, as often used, merely intensifiedthe negation. See "Measure for Measure, " act i. Scene 1. ]

At a meeting of the afflicted children and others, some one declaredthat Bridget Bishop was present "in her shape" or apparition, and, pointing to a particular spot, said, "There, there she is!" YoungJonathan Walcot, exasperated by his sister's sufferings, struck at thespot with his sword; whereupon Mary cried out, "You have hit her, youhave torn her coat, and I heard it tear. " This story had been broughtto Hathorne's ears; and abruptly, as if to take her off her guard, hesaid, "Is not your coat cut?" She answered, "No. " They then examinedthe coat, and found what they regarded as having been "cut or torn twoways. " It was probably the fashion in which the garment was made; forshe was in the habit of dressing more artistically than the women ofthe Village. At any rate, it did not appear like a direct cut of asword; but Jonathan got over the difficulty by saying that "the swordthat he struck at Goody Bishop was not naked, but was within thescabbard. " This explained the whole matter, so that Cheever says, inhis report, that "the rent may very probably be the very same thatMary Walcot did tell that she had in her coat, by Jonathan's strikingat her appearance"! Parris says, with more caution, more indeed thanwas usual with him, "Upon some search in the Court, a rent, that seemsto answer what was alleged, was found. "

Hathorne, having heard the scandals they had circulated against her, proceeded: "They say you bewitched your first husband to death. "--"Ifit please Your Worship, I know nothing of it. "--"What do you say ofthese murders you are charged with?"--"I hope I am not guilty ofmurder. " As she said this, she turned up her eyes, probably to givesolemnity to her declaration. At the opening of the examination, shelooked round upon the people, and called them to witness herinnocence. She had found out by this time, that no justice could beexpected from them; and feeling, with Rebecca Nurse on a recentsimilar occasion, "I have got nobody to look to but God, " she turnedher eyes heavenward. Instantly, the eyeballs of all the girls wererolled up in their sockets, and fixed. The effect was awful, and stillmore increased as they went, after a moment or two, into dreadfultorments. Hathorne could no longer contain himself, but broke out, "Doyou not see how they are tormented? You are acting witchcraft beforeus! What do you say to this? Why have you not a heart to confess thetruth?" She calmly replied, "I am innocent. I know nothing of it. I amno witch. I know not what a witch is. " The "afflicted children"charged her with having tried to persuade them to sign the Devil'sbook. As she had never before seen one of them, she was indignant atthis barefaced falsehood, and, as Cheever says, "shook her head" inher resentment; which, as he further says, put them all into greattorments. Parris represents that in every motion of her head they weretortured. Marshal Herrick, as usual, put in his oar, and volunteeredcharges against her. She bore herself well through the shocking scene, and did not shrink, at its close, from expressing her unbelief of thewhole thing: "I do not know whether there be any witches or no. " Whenshe was removed from the place of examination, the accusers all hadfits, and broke forth in outcries of agony. After being taken out, oneof the constables in charge of her asked her if she was not troubledto see the afflicted persons so tormented; and she replied, "No. " Inanswer to further questions, she indicated that she could not tellwhat to think of them, and did not concern herself about them at all. 

Giles Corey, Bridget Bishop, Abigail Hobbs, together with Mary Warren, were duly committed to prison. 

Two days after, April 21, warrants were issued "against William Hobbs, husbandman, and Deliverance his wife; Nehemiah Abbot, Jr. , weaver;Mary Easty, the wife of Isaac Easty; and Sarah Wilds, the wife of JohnWilds, --all of the town of Topsfield, or Ipswich; and Edward Bishop, husbandman, and Sarah his wife, of Salem Village; and Mary Black, anegro of Lieutenant Nathaniel Putnam's, of Salem Village also; andMary English, the wife of Philip English, merchant in Salem. " All ofthem were to be delivered to the magistrates for examination at thehouse of Lieutenant Nathaniel Ingersoll, at about ten o'clock the nextmorning, in Salem Village; and were brought in accordingly. 

What the papers on file enable us to glean of these nine persons issubstantially as follows: William Hobbs was about fifty years of age, and one of the earliest settlers of the Village, although hisresidence was on the territory afterwards included in Topsfield. Hisdaughter Abigail, of whom I have just spoken, appears from all theaccounts to have acted at this stage of the transaction a most wickedpart, ready to do all the mischief in her power, and allowing herselfto be used to any extent to fasten the imputation of witchcraft uponothers. Several persons testified that, long before, she had boastedthat she was not afraid of any thing, "for she had sold herself bodyand soul to the Old Boy;" one witness testified, that, "some time lastwinter, I was discoursing with Abigail Hobbs about her wickedcarriages and disobedience to her father and mother, and she told meshe did not care what anybody said to her, for she had seen the Devil, and had made a covenant or bargain with him;" another, MargaretKnight, testified, that, about a year before, "Abigail Hobbs and hermother were at my father's house, and Abigail Hobbs said to me, 'Margaret, are you baptized?' And I said, 'Yes. ' Then said she, 'Mymother is not baptized, but I will baptize her;' and immediately tookwater, and sprinkled in her mother's face, and said she did baptizeher 'in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. '"

She was arrested, and brought to the Village, on the 19th of April. The next day, she began her operations by declaring that "Judah White, a Jersey maid" that lived with Joseph Ingersoll at Casco, "but nowlives at Boston, " appeared to her "in apparition" the day before, andadvised her to "fly, and not to go to be examined, " but, if she didgo, "not to confess any thing:" she described the dress of this"apparition, "--she "came to her in fine clothes, in a sad-colored silkmantle, with a top-knot and a hood. "--"She confesseth further, thatthe Devil in the shape of a man came to her, " and charged her toafflict the girls; bringing images made of wood in their likeness withthorns for her to prick into the images, which she did: whereupon thegirls cried out that they were hurt by her. She further confessed, that, "she was at the great meeting in Mr. Parris's pasture, when theyadministered the sacrament, and did eat of the red bread and drink ofthe red wine, at the same time. " This confession established hercredibility at once; and, the next day, the warrants were issued forthe nine persons above mentioned, against whom they had secured in heran effective witness. She had resided for some time at Casco Bay; andwe shall soon see how matters began in a few days to work in thatdirection. There are two indictments against this Abigail Hobbs: onecharging her with having made a covenant with "the Evil Spirit, theDevil, " at Casco Bay, in 1688; the other with having exercised thearts of witchcraft upon the afflicted girls, at Salem Village, in1692. 

When her unhappy father was brought to examination, he found that hisdaughter was playing into the hands of the accusers; and that hiswife, overwhelmed by the horrors of the situation, although for a timeprotesting her innocence and lamenting that she had been the mother ofsuch a daughter, had broken down and confessed, saying whatever mightbe put in her mouth by the magistrates, the girls, or the crowd. Underthese circumstances, he was brought forward for examination. Parristook minutes of it. It is to be regretted, that the paper is muchdilapidated, and portions of the lines wholly lost. What is left showsthat the mind of William Hobbs rose superior to the terrors andpowers arrayed against it. The magistrate commenced proceedings byinquiring of the girls, pointing to the prisoner, "Hath this man hurtyou?" Several of them answered "Yes. " Goody Bibber, who seemsgenerally to have been a very zealous volunteer backer of the girls, on this occasion, for a wonder, answered "No. " The magistrate, addressing the prisoner, "What say you? Are you guilty ornot?"--Answer: "I can speak in the presence of God safely, as I mustlook to give account another day, that I am as clear as a new-bornbabe. "--"Clear of what?"--"Of witchcraft. "--"Have you never hurtthese?"--"No. " Abigail Williams cried out that he "was going to MercyLewis!" Whereupon Mercy was seized with a fit. Then Abigail cried outagain, "He is coming to Mary Walcot!" and Mary went into her fit. Themagistrate, in consternation, appealed to him: "How can you be clear, "when your appearance is thus seen producing such effects before oureyes? Then the children went into fits all together, and "hallooed" atthe top of their voices, and "shouted greatly. " The magistrate thenbrought up the confession of his wife against him, and expostulatedwith him for not confessing; the afflicted, in the mean while, bringing the whole machinery of their convulsions, shrieks, and uproarto bear against him: but he calmly, and in brief terms, denied it. 

The circle of accusing girls seems to have been a receptacle, intowhich all the scandal, gossip, and defamation of the surroundingcountry was emptied. Some one had told them that William Hobbs was nota regular attendant at meeting. They passed it on to the magistrate, and he put this question to the accused: "When were you at any publicreligious meeting?" He replied, "Not a pretty while. "--"Whyso?"--"Because I was not well: I had a distemper that none knows. " Themagistrate said, "Can you act witchcraft here, and, by casting youreyes, turn folks into fits?"--"You may judge your pleasure. My soul isclear. "--"Do you not see you hurt these by your look?"--"No: I do notknow it. " After another display of awful sufferings, caused, as theyprotested, by the mere look of Hobbs, the magistrate, with triumphantconfidence, again put it home to him, "Can you now deny it?" Heanswered, "I can deny it to my dying day. " The magistrate inquired ofhim for what reason he withdrew from the room whenever the Scriptureswere read in his family. He plumply denied it. Nathaniel Ingersoll andThomas Haynes testified that his daughter had told them so. Theconfessions of his wife and daughter were over and over again broughtup against him, but to no effect. "Who do you worship?" said themagistrate. "I hope I worship God only. "--"Where?"--"In my heart. " Theexamination failed to confound or embarrass him in the least. He couldnot be drawn into the expression of any of the feelings which theconduct of his graceless and depraved daughter or his weak andwretched wife must have excited. He quietly protested that he knewnothing about witchcraft; and, towards the close, with solemnearnestness of utterance, declared that his innocence was known to the"great God in heaven. "

He was committed for trial. All that the documents in existence informus further, in relation to William Hobbs, is that he remained inprison until the 14th of the next December, when two of his neighbors, John Nichols and Joseph Towne, in some way succeeded in getting himbailed out; they giving bonds in the sum of two hundred pounds for hisappearance at the sessions of the Court the next month. But it wasnot, even then, thought wholly safe to have him come in; and the finewas incurred. He appeared at the term in May, the fine was remitted, and he discharged by proclamation. On the 26th of March, 1714, he gaveevidence in a case of commonage rights. He was then seventy-two yearsof age. Of his wife and daughter, I shall again have occasion tospeak. 

For all that is known of the case of Nehemiah Abbot, we are indebtedto Hutchinson, who had Parris's minutes of the examination before him. Hutchinson says, that, of "near an hundred" whose examinations he hadseen, he was the only one who, having been brought before themagistrates, was finally dismissed by them. Perhaps even this case wasnot an exception: for a document on file shows that a person namedAbbot of the same locality was subsequently arrested and imprisoned;but unfortunately the Christian name has been obliterated, or fromsome cause is wanting. It seems, from Hutchinson's minutes, that heprotested his innocence in manly and firm declarations. Mary Walcottestified that she had seen his shape. Ann Putnam cried out that shesaw him "upon the beam. " The magistrates told him that his guilt wascertainly proved, and that, if he would find mercy of God, he mustconfess. "I speak before God, " he answered, "that I am clear from thisaccusation. "--"What, in all respects?"--"Yes, in all respects. " Thegirls were struck with dumbness; and Ann Putnam, re-affirming that hewas the man that hurt her, "was taken with a fit. " Mary Walcot beganto waver in her confidence, and Mercy Lewis said, "It is not the man. "This unprecedented variance in the testimony of the girls broughtmatters to a stand; and he was sent out for a time, while others wereexamined:--

 "When he was brought in again, by reason of much people, and many in the windows, so that the accusers could not have a clear view of him, he was ordered to be abroad, and the accusers to go forth to him, and view him in the light, which they did in the presence of the magistrates and many others, discoursed quietly with him, one and all acquitting him; but yet said he was like that man, but he had not the wen they saw in his apparition. Note, he was a hilly-faced man, and stood shaded by reason of his own hair; so that for a time he seemed to some bystanders and observers to be considerably like the person the afflicted did describe. "

Such is Parris's statement, as quoted by Hutchinson. What was the realcause or motive of this discrepancy among the witnesses does notappear. The facts, that at first they went into fits in beholding him, were all struck dumb for a while, and Ann Putnam saw him on the beam, were likely to have an unfavorable effect upon the minds of thepeople, and threatened to explode the delusion. But Ann, with aquickness of wit that never failed to meet any emergency, when MercyLewis said it was not the man, cried out in a fit, "Did you put a mistbefore my eyes?" She conveyed the idea that the power of Satan blindedher, and caused her to mistake the man. This answered the purpose;and, although Abbot got clear, for the time at least, all were morethan ever convinced that the Evil One, in misleading Ann, had shownhis hand on the occasion. 

The examination of Sarah Wildes had no peculiar features. Theafflicted children and Goody Bibber saw her apparition sitting on thebeam while she was bodily present at the bar, and went through theirusual fits and evolutions. She maintained her innocence with dignityand firmness; and the magistrate, prejudging the case against her, rebuked her obstinacy in not confessing, in his accustomed manner. 

No account has come down of the examinations of Edward Bishop, orSarah his wife. He was the third of that name, probably the son of the"Sawyer. " His wife Sarah was a daughter of William Wildes of Ipswich, and, it would seem, a sister of John Wildes, the examination of whosewife has just been mentioned. Some of the evidence indicates that shewas a niece of Rebecca Nurse. They all belonged to that class ofpersons who, under the general appellation of "the Topsfield men, " hadbeen in such frequent collision with the people of the Village. EdwardBishop was forty-four years of age, and his wife forty-one. They had afamily, at the time of their imprisonment, of twelve children. SarahBishop had been dismissed from the church at the Village, andrecommended to that at Topsfield, May 25, 1690. They had land inTopsfield, as well as in the Village, and were more intimatelyconnected in social relations with the former than the latter place. They effected their escape from prison, and survived the storm. Mary, the wife of Philip English, was committed to prison. We have no recordof her examination. 

Mary Black, the negro woman, belonged to Nathaniel Putnam, but livedin the family of his son Benjamin. Her examination shows that she wasan ignorant but an innocent person. She knew nothing about the matter, and had no idea what it all meant. To the questions with which themagistrate pressed her, her answers were, "I do not know, " "I cannottell. " The only fact brought out against her besides the actings ofthe girls was this: "Her master saith a man sat down upon the formwith her about a twelvemonth ago. " Parris, in his minutes, gives thispiece of evidence, but does not enlighten us as to its import. Themagistrate asked her, "What did the man say to you?" Her answer was:"He said nothing. " This is all they got out of her; and it is all thelight we have on the mysterious fact, that a man was once seated, atsome time within twelve months, on the same form or bench with poorMary Black. The magistrate asked the girls, "Doth this negro hurtyou?" They said "Yes. "--"Why do you hurt them?"--"I did not hurtthem. " This question was put to her, "Do you prick sticks?" perhapsthe meaning was, Do you prick the afflicted children with sticks? Thesimple creature evidently did not know what they were driving at, andanswered, "No: I pin my neckcloth. " The examiner asked her, "Will youtake out the pin, and pin it again?" She did so, and several of theafflicted cried out that they were pricked. Mary Walcot was pricked inthe arm till the blood came, Abigail Williams was pricked in thestomach, and Mercy Lewis was pricked in the foot. It is probable, that, in this case, the girls, as they often appear to have done, provided themselves by concert beforehand with pins ready to be stuckinto the assigned parts of their bodies, and managed to get the queerand unusual question put. The whole thing has the appearance of beingpre-arranged; and it answered the purpose, filling the crowd withamazement, and excluding all possible doubt from the minds of themagistrates. Mary was committed to prison, where she remained untildischarged, in May, 1693, by proclamation from the governor. 

Mary Easty, wife of Isaac Easty, and sister of Rebecca Nurse andSarah Cloyse, was about fifty-eight years of age, and the mother ofseven children. Her husband owned and lived upon a large and valuablefarm, which not many years since was the property and countryresidence of the late Hon. B. W. Crowninshield, and is now in thepossession of Thomas Pierce, Esq. Her examination was accompanied bythe usual circumstances. The girls had fits, and were speechless attimes: the magistrate expostulated with her for not confessing herguilt, which he regarded as demonstrated, beyond a question, by thesufferings of the afflicted. "Would you have me accuse myself?"--"Howfar, " he continued, "have you complied with Satan?"--"Sir, I nevercomplied, but prayed against him all my days. What would you have medo?"--"Confess, if you be guilty. "--"I will say it, if it was my lasttime, I am clear of this sin. " The magistrate, apparently affected byher manner and bearing, inquired of the girls, "Are you certain thisis the woman?" They all went into fits; and presently Ann Putnam, coming to herself, said "that was the woman, it was like her, and shetold me her name. " The accused clasped her hands together, and MercyLewis's hands were clenched; she separated her hands, and Mercy's werereleased; she inclined her head, and the girls screamed out, "Put upher head; for, while her head is bowed, the necks of these arebroken. " The magistrate again asked, "Is this the woman?" They madesigns that they could not speak; but afterwards Ann Putnam and otherscried out: "O Goody Easty, Goody Easty, you are the woman, you are thewoman!"--"What do you say to this?"--"Why, God will know. "--"Nay, Godknows now. "--"I know he does. "--"What did you think of the actions ofothers before your sisters came out? did you think it waswitchcraft?"--"I cannot tell. "--"Why do you not think it iswitchcraft?"--"It is an evil spirit; but whether it be witchcraft I donot know. " She was committed to prison. 

It will be noticed that seven out of the nine examined at this timeeither lived in Topsfield or were intimately connected with the churchand people there. The accusing girls had heard them angrily spoken ofby the people around them, and availed themselves, as at all times, ofexisting prejudices, to guide them in the selection of their victim. 

The escape of Abbot, and the wavering, in his case and that of Easty, indicated by the magistrates on this occasion, alarmed theprosecutors; and they felt that something must be done to stiffenHathorne and Corwin to their previous rigid method of procedure. Thefollowing letter was accordingly written to them that very day, immediately after the close of the examinations:--

 "_These to the Honored John Hathorne and Jonathan Corwin, Esqrs. , living at Salem, present. _

 "SALEM VILLAGE, this 21st of April, 1692. 

 "MUCH HONORED, --After most humble and hearty thanks presented to Your Honors for the great care and pains you have already taken for us, --for which you know we are never able to make you recompense, and we believe you do not expect it of us; therefore a full reward will be given you of the Lord God of Israel, whose cause and interest you have espoused (and we trust this shall add to your crown of glory in the day of the Lord Jesus): and we--beholding continually the tremendous works of Divine Providence, not only every day, but every hour--thought it our duty to inform Your Honors of what we conceive you have not heard, which are high and dreadful, --of a wheel within a wheel, at which our ears do tingle. Humbly craving continually your prayers and help in this distressed case, --so, praying Almighty God continually to prepare you, that you may be a terror to evil-doers and a praise to them that do well, we remain yours to serve in what we are able, "THOMAS PUTNAM. "

What was meant by the "wheel within a wheel, " the "high and dreadful"things which were making their ears to tingle, but had not yet beendisclosed to the magistrates, we shall presently see. On the 30th ofApril, Captain Jonathan Walcot and Sergeant Thomas Putnam (the writerof the foregoing letter) got out a warrant against Philip English, ofSalem, merchant; Sarah Morrel, of Beverly; and Dorcas Hoar, of thesame place, widow. Morrel and Hoar were delivered by Marshal Herrick, according to the tenor of the warrant, at 11, A. M. , May 2, atthe house of Lieutenant Nathaniel Ingersoll, in Salem Village. Thewarrant has an indorsement in these words: "Mr. Philip English notbeing to be found. G. H. " As the records of the examinations of PhilipEnglish and his wife have not been preserved, and only a fewfragments of the testimony relating to their case are to be found, allthat can be said is that the girls and their accomplices made theirusual charges against them. There are two depositions in existence, however, which afford some explanation of the causes that exposed Mr. English to hostility, and indicate the kind of evidence that wasbrought against him. Having many landed estates, in various places, and extensive business transactions, he was liable to frequentquestions of litigation. He was involved, at one time, in a lawsuitabout the bounds of a piece of land in Marblehead. A person namedWilliam Beale, of that town, had taken great interest in it adverselyto the claims of English; and some harsh words passed between them. Ayear or two after the affair, Beale states, "that, as I lay in my bed, in the morning, presently after it was fair light abroad in the room, ""I saw a dark shade, " &c. To his vision it soon assumed the shape ofPhilip English. On a previous occasion, when riding through Lynn toget testimony against English in the aforesaid boundary case, he says, "My nose gushed out bleeding in a most extraordinary manner, so thatit bloodied a handkerchief of considerable bigness, and also ran downupon my clothes and upon my horse's mane. " He charged it upon English. These depositions were sworn to in Court, in August, 1692, andJanuary, 1693. How they got there does not appear, as English wasnever brought to trial. All that relates to Mr. English and his wifemay be despatched at this point. On the 6th of May, a warrant wasprocured at Boston, "To the marshal-general, or his lawful deputy, " toapprehend Philip English wherever found within the jurisdiction, andconvey him to the "custody of the marshal of Essex. " Jacob Manning, adeputy-marshal, delivered him to the marshal of Essex on the 30th ofMay; and he was brought before the magistrates on the next day, and, after examination, committed to prison. He and his wife effected theirescape from jail, and found refuge in New York until the proceedingswere terminated, when they returned to Salem, and continued to residehere. She survived the shock given by the accusation, the danger towhich she had been exposed, and the sufferings of imprisonment, but ashort time. They occupied the highest social position. He was amerchant, conducting an extensive business, and had a large estate;owning fourteen buildings in the town, a wharf, and twenty-one sail ofvessels. His dwelling-house, represented in the frontispiece of thisvolume, stood until a recent period, and is remembered by many of us. Its site was on the southern side of Essex Street, near itstermination; comprising the area between English and Webb Streets. Itmust have been a beautiful situation; commanding at that time a full, unobstructed view of the Beverly and Marblehead shores, and all thewaters and points of land between them. The mansion was spacious inits dimensions, and bore the marks of having been constructed in thebest style of elegance, strength, and finish. It was indeed a curiousand venerable specimen of the domestic architecture of its day. Afirst-class house then; in its proportions, arrangements, andattachments, it would compare well with first-class houses now. Mrs. English was a lady of eminent character and culture. Traditions tothis effect have come down with singular uniformity through all theold families of the place. She was the only child of RichardHollingsworth, and inherited his large property. The Rev. WilliamBentley, D. D. , in his "Description of Salem, " and whose daily lifemade him conversant with all that relates to the locality of Mrs. English's residence, says that the officer came to apprehend her inthe evening, after she had retired to rest. He was admitted by theservants, and read his warrant in her bedchamber. Guards were placedaround the house. To be accused by the afflicted children was thenregarded as certain death. "In the morning, " says Bentley, "sheattended the devotions of her family, kissed her children with greatcomposure, proposed her plan for their education, took leave of them, and then told the officer she was ready to die. " Dr. Bentley suggeststhat unfriendly feelings may have existed against Mr. English inconsequence of some controversies he had been engaged in with the townabout the title to lands; that the superior style in which his familylived had subjected them to vulgar prejudice; that the existence ofthis feeling becoming known to the "afflicted girls" led them to cryout against him and his wife. It may be so. They availed themselves ofevery such advantage; and particularly liked to strike high, so as themore to astound and overawe the public mind. 

I find no further mention of Sarah Morrel. She doubtless shared thefate of those escaping death, --a long imprisonment. When Dorcas Hoarwas brought in, there was a general commotion among the afflicted, falling into fits all around. After coming out of them, they vied witheach other in heaping all sorts of accusations upon the prisoner;Abigail Williams and Ann Putnam charging her with having choked awoman in Boston; Elizabeth Hubbard crying out that she was pinchingher, "and showing the marks to the standers by. The marshal said shepinched her fingers at the time. " The magistrate, indignantlybelieving the whole, said, "Dorcas Hoar, why do you hurt these?"--"Inever hurt any child in my life. " The girls then charged her withhaving killed her husband, and with various other crimes. Mary Walcot, Susanna Sheldon, and Abigail Williams said they saw a black manwhispering in her ear. The spirit of the prisoner was raised; and shesaid, "Oh, you are liars, and God will stop the mouth of liars!" Theanger of the magistrates was roused by this bold outbreak. "You arenot to speak after this manner in the Court. "--"I will speak the truthas long as I live, " she fearlessly replied. Parris says, at the closeof his account, "The afflicted were much distressed during herexamination. " Of course, she was sent to prison. 

Susanna Martin of Amesbury, a widow, was arrested on a warrant datedApril 30, and examined at the Village church May 2. She is describedas a short active woman, wearing a hood and scarf, plump and welldeveloped in her figure, of remarkable personal neatness. One of theitems of the evidence against her was, that, "in an extraordinarydirty season, when it was not fit for any person to travel, she cameon foot" to a house at Newbury. The woman of the house, the substanceof whose testimony I am giving, having asked, "whether she came fromAmesbury afoot, " expressed her surprise at her having ventured abroadin such bad walking, and bid her children make way for her to come tothe fire to dry herself. She replied "she was as dry as I was, " andturned her coats aside; "and I could not perceive that the soles ofher shoes were wet. I was startled at it, that she should come so dry;and told her that I should have been wet up to my knees, if I shouldhave come so far on foot. " She replied that "she scorned to have adrabbled tail. " The good woman who treated Susanna Martin on thisoccasion with such hospitable kindness received the impression, asappears by the import of her deposition, that, because Martin cameinto the house so wonderfully dry, she was therefore a witch. The onlyinference we are likely to draw is, that she was a particularly neatperson; careful to pick her way; and did not wear skirts of thedimensions of our times. 

The language reported by this witness to have been used by SusannaMartin created in her, at the time, visible mortification, as well asresentment. A writer at the period, not by any means inclined to givea representation favorable to the prisoners, reports her expressionthus: "She scorned to be drabbled. " She was undoubtedly a woman whospoke her mind freely, and with strength of expression, as themagistrates found. From this cause, perhaps, she had shocked theprejudices and violated the conventional scrupulosities thenprevalent, to such a degree as to incur much comment, if not scandal. There had been a good deal of gossip about her; and, some time before, she had been proceeded against as a witch. But there was no ground forany serious charges against her character. Like Mrs. Ann Hibbens, perhaps the head and front of her offending was that she had more witthan her neighbors. She certainly was a strong-minded woman, as herexamination shows. Two reports of it, each in the handwriting ofParris, have come down to us. They are almost identical, and insubstance as follows:--

On the appearance of the accused, many of the witnesses against herinstantly fell into fits. The magistrate inquired of them, --

 "Hath this woman hurt you?"

 "(Abigail Williams declared that she had hurt her often. 'Ann Putnam threw her glove at her in a fit, ' and the rest were struck dumb at her presence. )

 "What! do you laugh at it? said the magistrate. --Well I may at such folly. 

 "Is this folly to see these so hurt?--I never hurt man, woman, or child. 

 "(Mercy Lewis cried out, 'She hath hurt me a great many times, and plucks me down. ' Then Martin laughed again. Several others cried out upon her, and the magistrate again addressed her. )

 "What do you say to this?--I have no hand in witchcraft. 

 "What did you do? did you consent these should be hurt?--No, never in my life. 

 "What ails these people?--I do not know. 

 "But what do you think ails them?--I do not desire to spend my judgment upon it. 

 "Do you think they are bewitched?--No: I do not think they are. 

 "Well, tell us your thoughts about them. --My thoughts are mine own when they are in; but, when they are out, they are another's. 

 "Who do you think is their master?--If they be dealing in the black art, you may know as well as I. 

 "What have you done towards the hurt of these?--I have done nothing. 

 "Why, it is you, or your appearance. --I cannot help it. 

 "How comes your appearance just now to hurt these?--How do I know?

 "Are you not willing to tell the truth?--I cannot tell. He that appeared in Samuel's shape can appear in any one's shape. 

 "Do you believe these afflicted persons do not say true?--They may lie, for aught I know. 

 "May not you lie?--I dare not tell a lie, if it would save my life. "

At this point, the marshal declared that "she pinched her hands, andElizabeth Hubbard was immediately afflicted. Several of the afflictedcried out that they saw her upon the beam" of the meeting-house overtheir heads; and there was, no doubt, a scene of frightful excitement. The magistrate, in the depth of his awe and distress, earnestlyappealed to the accused, "Pray God discover you, if you be guilty. "Nothing daunted, she replied, "Amen, amen. A false tongue will nevermake a guilty person. " A great uproar then arose. The accusers fellinto dreadful convulsions, among the rest John Indian, who cried out, "She bites, she bites!" The magistrate, overcome by the sight of thesesufferings, again appealed to her, "Have not you compassion for theseafflicted?" She calmly and firmly answered, "No: I have none. " Theuproar rose higher. The accusers all declared that they saw the "blackman, " Satan himself, standing by her side. They pretended to try toapproach her, but were suddenly deprived of the power of locomotion. John Indian attempted to rush upon her, but fell sprawling upon thefloor. The magistrate again appealed to her: "What is the reason thesecannot come near you?"--"I cannot tell. It may be the Devil bears memore malice than another. "--"Do you not see God evidently discoveringyou?"--"No, not a bit for that. "--"All the congregation besides thinkso. "--"Let them think what they will. "--"What is the reason thesecannot come to you?"--"I do not know but they can, if they will; orelse, if you please, I will come to them. "--"What was that the blackman whispered to you?"--"There was none whispered to me. " She wascommitted to prison. 

In the mean while, preparations had been going on to bring upon thestage a more striking character, and give to the excited public mind agreater shock than had yet been experienced. Intimations had beenthrown out that higher culprits than had been so far brought to lightwere in reserve, and would, in due time, be unmasked. It was hintedthat a minister had joined the standard of the Arch-enemy, and wasleading the devilish confederacy. In the accounts given of thediabolical sacraments, a man in black had been described, but no nameyet given. As Charles the Second, while they were hanging theregicides, at the Restoration, was looking about for a preacher tohang, and used Hugh Peters for the occasion; so the "afflictedchildren, " or those acting behind them, wanted a minister to completethe _dramatis personæ_ of their tragedy. His connection with thesociety and its controversies, and the animosities which had thusbecome attached to him, naturally suggested Mr. Burroughs. He was thenpursuing, as usual, a laborious, humble, self-sacrificing ministry, inthe midst of perils and privations, away down in the frontiersettlements on the coast of Maine, and little dreamed of what wasbrewing, for his ruin and destruction, in his former parish at thevillage. This is what Thomas Putnam had in his mind when he spoke of a"wheel within a wheel, " and "the high and dreadful" things not thendisclosed that were to make "ears tingle. "

It was necessary to be at once cautious and rapid in their movements, to prevent the public from getting information which, by reaching theears of Burroughs, might put him on his guard. It was no easy thing tosecure him at the great distance of his place of residence. If heshould become apprised of what was going on, his escape into remoterand inaccessible settlements would have baffled the whole scheme. Nothing therefore was done at the village, but the steps to arrest himoriginated at Boston. Elisha Hutchinson, a magistrate there, issuedthe proper order, addressed to John Partridge of Portsmouth, Field-marshal of the provinces of New Hampshire and Maine, dated April30, 1692, to arrest George Burroughs, "preacher at Wells;" he being"suspected of a confederacy with the Devil. " Partridge was directed todeliver him to the custody of the marshal of Essex, or, not meetinghim, was requested to bring him to Salem, and hand him over to themagistrates there. The "afflicted children" had begun, shortly before, to use his name. Abigail Hobbs had resided some years before at Casco;and from her they obtained all the scandal she had heard there, orchose to fabricate to suit the purpose of the prosecutors. The way inwhich the minds of the deluded people were worked up against Mr. Burroughs is illustrated in a deposition subsequently made to thiseffect:--

Benjamin Hutchinson testified, that, on the 21st of April, 1692, abouteleven o'clock in the forenoon, Abigail Williams told him that she sawa person whom she described as Mr. George Burroughs, "a little blackminister that lived at Casco Bay. " Mr. Burroughs was of small statureand dark complexion. She gave an account of his wonderful feats ofstrength, said that he was a wizard; and that he "had killed threewives, two for himself and one for Mr. Lawson. " She affirmed that shesaw him then. Mr. Burroughs, it will be borne in mind, was at thistime a hundred miles away, at his home in Maine. Hutchinson asked herwhere she saw him. She said "There, " pointing to a rut in the roadmade by a cart-wheel. He had an iron fork in his hand, and threw itwhere she said Burroughs was standing. Instantly she fell into a fit;and, when she came out of it, said, "'You have torn his coat, for Iheard it tear. '--'Whereabouts?' said I. 'On one side, ' said she. Thenwe came into the house of Lieutenant Ingersoll; and I went into thegreat room, and Abigail came in and said, 'There he stands. ' I said, 'Where? where?' and presently drew my rapier. " Then Abigail said, hehas gone, but "'there is a gray cat. ' Then I said, 'Whereabouts?''There!' said she, 'there!' Then I struck with my rapier, and she fellinto a fit; and, when it was over, she said, 'You killed her. '" PoorHutchinson could not see the cat he had killed any more thanBurroughs's coat he had torn. Abigail explained the mystery to hissatisfaction, by saying that the spectre of Sarah Good had come in atthe moment, and carried away the dead cat. This was all in broaddaylight; it being, as Hutchinson testified, "about twelve o'clock. "The same day, "after lecture, in said Ingersoll's chamber, " AbigailWilliams and Mary Walcot were present. They said that "Goody Hobbs, ofTopsfield, had bit Mary Walcot by the foot. " Then both fell into afit; and on coming out, "they saw William Hobbs and his wife go bothof them along the table. " Hutchinson instantly stabbed, with hisrapier, "Goody Hobbs on her side, " as the two girls declared. Theyfurther said that the room was "full of them, " that is of witches, intheir apparitions; then Hutchinson and Eleazer Putnam "stabbed withtheir rapiers at a venture. " The girls cried out, that they "hadkilled a great black woman of Stonington, and an Indian who had comewith her:" the girls said further, "The floor is all covered withblood;" and, rushing to the window, declared that they saw a greatcompany of witches on a hill, and that three of them "lay dead"there, --"the black woman, the Indian, and one more that they knewnot. " This was about four o'clock in the afternoon. This evidence wasgiven and received in court. It shows the audacity with which thegirls imposed upon the credulity of a people wrought up by their artsto the highest pitch of insane infatuation; and illustrates acondition of things, at that time and place, that is trulyastonishing. 

On the evening before Hutchinson was imposed upon, as just described, by Abigail Williams and Mary Walcot, Ann Putnam had made mostastonishing disclosures, at her father's house, in his presence andthat of Peter Prescott, Robert Morrel, and Ezekiel Cheever. An accountof the affair was drawn up by her father, and sworn to by her, inthese words:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF ANN PUTNAM, who testifieth and saith, on the 20th of April, 1692, at evening, she saw the apparition of a minister, at which she was grievously affrighted, and cried out, 'Oh, dreadful, dreadful! here is a minister come! What! are ministers witches too? Whence came you, and what is your name? for I will complain of you, though you be a minister, if you be a wizard. ' Immediately I was tortured by him, being racked and almost choked by him. And he tempted me to write in his book, which I refused with loud outcries, and said I would not write in his book though he tore me all to pieces, but told him it was a dreadful thing that he, which was a minister, that should teach children to fear God, should come to persuade poor creatures to give their souls to the Devil. 'Oh, dreadful, dreadful! Tell me your name, that I may know who you are. ' Then again he tortured me, and urged me to write in his book, which I refused. And then, presently, he told me that his name was George Burroughs, and that he had had three wives, and that he had bewitched the two first of them to death; and that he killed Mrs. Lawson, because she was so unwilling to go from the Village, and also killed Mr. Lawson's child because he went to the eastward with Sir Edmon, and preached so to the soldiers; and that he had bewitched a great many soldiers to death at the eastward when Sir Edmon was there; and that he had made Abigail Hobbs a witch, and several witches more. And he has continued ever since, by times, tempting me to write in his book, and grievously torturing me by beating, pinching, and almost choking me several times a day. He also told me that he was above a witch. He was a conjurer. "

Her father and the other persons present made oath that they saw andheard all this at the time; that "they beheld her tortures andperceived her hellish temptations by her loud outcries, 'I will not, Iwill not write, though you torment me all the days of my life. '" Itwill be observed that this was the evening before Thomas Putnam wrotehis letter to the magistrates, preparing them for something "high anddreadful" that was soon to be brought to light. 

A similar scene took place not long afterwards, in the presence of herfather and her uncle Edward, to which they also testify. It was thusdescribed by her under oath:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF ANN PUTNAM, who testifieth and saith, that, on the 8th of May, at evening, I saw the apparition of Mr. George Burroughs, who grievously tortured me, and urged me to write in his book, which I refused. He then told me that his two first wives would appear to me presently, and tell me a great many lies, but I should not believe them. Then immediately appeared to me the forms of two women in winding-sheets, and napkins about their heads, at which I was greatly affrighted; and they turned their faces towards Mr. Burroughs, and looked very red and angry, and told him that he had been a cruel man to them, and that their blood did cry for vengeance against him; and also told him that they should be clothed with white robes in heaven, when he should be cast into hell: and immediately he vanished away. And, as soon as he was gone, the two women turned their faces towards me, and looked as pale as a white wall; and told me that they were Mr. Burroughs's two first wives, and that he had murdered them. And one of them told me that she was his first wife, and he stabbed her under the left arm, and put a piece of sealing-wax on the wound. And she pulled aside the winding-sheet, and showed me the place; and also told me, that she was in the house where Mr. Parris now lives, when it was done. And the other told me, that Mr. Burroughs and that wife which he hath now, killed her in the vessel, as she was coming to see her friends, because they would have one another. And they both charged me that I should tell these things to the magistrates before Mr. Burroughs' face; and, if he did not own them, they did not know but they should appear there. This morning, also, Mrs. Lawson and her daughter Ann appeared to me, whom I knew, and told me Mr. Burroughs murdered them. This morning also appeared to me another woman in a winding-sheet, and told me that she was Goodman Fuller's first wife, and Mr. Burroughs killed her because there was some difference between her husband and him. "

This was indeed most extraordinary language and imagery to have beenused by a child of twelve years of age. It is not strange, that, upona community, whose fancies and fears had been so long wrought upon, holding their views, the effect was awfully great. The very fact thatit was a child that spoke made her declarations seem supernatural. Then, again, they were accompanied with such ocular demonstration, inher terrible bodily sufferings, that none remained in doubt of thetruthfulness and reality of what they listened to and beheld. It didnot enter their imaginations, for a moment, that there was anydeception or imposture, or even delusion, on her part. Her case istruly a problem not easily solved even now. While we are filled withhorror and indignation at the thought that she figures as a capitaland fatal witness in all the trials, it is impossible not to feel thata wisdom greater than ours is necessary to fathom the dark mystery ofthe phenomena presented by her and her mother and other accusers, inthis monstrous and terrible affair. 

These occurrences, happening just before Mr. Burroughs was brought tothe village as a prisoner, were bruited from house to house, frommouth to mouth, and worked the people to a state of horrifiedexasperation against him; and he was met with execration, when, on the4th of May, Field-marshal Partridge appeared with him at Salem, anddelivered him to the jailer there. When we consider the distance andthe circumstances of travel at that time, it is evident that theofficers charged with the service acted with the greatest promptitude, celerity, and energy. The tradition is, that they found Mr. Burroughsin his humble home, partaking of his frugal meal; that he wassnatched from the table without a moment's opportunity to provide forhis family, or prepare himself for the journey, and hurried on his wayroughly, and without the least explanation of what it all meant. Assoon as it was known that he was in jail in Salem, arrangements werecommenced for his examination. The public mind was highly excited; andit was determined to make the occasion as impressive, effective, andawe-striking as possible. Another "field-day" was to be had. On the9th of May, a special session of the Magistracy was held, --WilliamStoughton coming from Dorchester, and Samuel Sewall from Boston, tosit with Hathorne and Corwin, and give greater solemnity and severityto the proceedings. Stoughton presided. The first step in theproceedings was to have a private hearing, in the presence of themagistrates and ministers only; and the report of what passed theregives proof of what is indicated more or less clearly in severalpassages in the accounts that have come down to us in reference to Mr. Burroughs, --that he was regarded as not wholly sound in doctrine onpoints not connected with witchcraft, was treated with specialseverity on that account, and made the victim of bigoted prejudiceamong his brethren and in the churches. In this secret inquisition, hewas called to account for not attending the communion service on oneor two occasions; he being a member of the church at Roxbury. It wasalso brought against him, that none of his children but the eldest hadbeen baptized. What the facts, in these respects, were, it isimpossible to say; as we know of them only through the charges of hisenemies. After this, he was carried to the place of public meeting;and, as he entered the room, "many, if not all, the bewitched weregrievously tortured. " After the confusion had subsided, SusannaSheldon testified that Burroughs' two wives had appeared to her "intheir winding-sheets, " and said, "That man killed them. " He wasordered to look on the witness; and, as he turned to do so, he"knocked down, " as the reporter affirms, "all (or most) of theafflicted that stood behind him. " Ann Putnam, and the several other"afflicted children, " bore their testimony in a similar strain againsthim, interspersing at intervals, all their various convulsions, outcries, and tumblings. Mercy Lewis had "a dreadful and tedious fit. "Walcot, Hubbard, and Sheldon were cast into torments simultaneously. At length, they were "so tortured" that "authority ordered them" to beremoved. Their sufferings were greater than the magistrates and peoplecould longer endure to look upon. The question was put to Burroughs, "what he thought of these things. " He answered, "it was an amazing andhumbling providence, but he understood nothing of it. " Throwing asideall the foolish and ridiculous gossip and all the monstrous fablesthat belong to the accusations against him, and looking at the onlyknown facts in his history, it appears that Mr. Burroughs was a man ofingenuous nature, free from guile, unsuspicious of guile in others; adisinterested, humble, patient, and generous person. He had sufferedmuch wrong, and endured great hardships in life; but they had notimpaired his readiness to labor and suffer for others. There was nocombativeness or vindictiveness in his disposition. Even in the midstof the unspeakable outrages he was experiencing on this occasion, hedoes not appear to be incensed or irritated, but simply "amazed. " Tohave such horrid crimes laid to him, instead of rousing a violentspirit within him, impressed him with a humbling sense of aninscrutable Providence. There is a remarkable similarity in the mannerin which Rebecca Nurse and George Burroughs received the dreadfulaccusations brought against them. "Surely, " she said, "what sin hathGod found out in me unrepented of that he should lay such anaffliction upon me in my old age?" His words are, "It is an humblingprovidence of God. " The more we reflect upon this language, and go tothe depths of the spirit that suggested it, the more we realize, that, in each case, it arose from a sanctified Christian heart, and is anattestation in vindication and in honor of the sufferers from whoselips it fell, that outweighs all passions and prejudices, reverses allverdicts, and commands the conviction of all fair and honest minds. 

After the "afflicted" had been sent out of the room, there wastestimony to show that Mr. Burroughs had given proof of physicalstrength, which, in a man of his small stature, was sure evidence thathe was in league with the Devil. Many marvellous statements were madeto this effect, some of the most extravagant of which he denied. Heundoubtedly was a person of great strength. He had cultivated muscularexercise and development while an undergraduate at Cambridge, and wasearly celebrated as a gymnast. After a while, the accusers andafflicted were again brought in. Abigail Hobbs testified that she waspresent at a "witch meeting, in the field near Mr. Parris's house, " inwhich Mr. Burroughs acted a conspicuous part. Mary Warren swore that"Mr. Burroughs had a trumpet which he blew to summon the witches totheir feasts" and other meetings "near Mr. Parris's house. " Thistrumpet had a sound that reached over the country far and wide, sending its blasts to Andover, and wakening its echoes along theMerrimack, to Cape Ann, and the uttermost settlements everywhere; sothat the witches, hearing it, would mount their brooms, and alight, ina moment, in Mr. Parris's orchard, just to the north and west of theparsonage; but its sound was not heard by any other ears than those ofconfederates with Satan. While the girls were giving their testimony, every once in a while they would be dreadfully choked, appearing to bein the last stages of suffocation and strangulation; and, coming to, at intervals, would charge it upon Burroughs or other witches, callingthem by name; generally, however, confining their selection to personsalready apprehended, and not bringing in others until measures werematured. Mr. Burroughs was committed for trial. 

The examination of Mr. Burroughs presented a spectacle, all thingsconsidered, of rare interest and curiosity, --the grave dignity of themagistrates; the plain, dark figure of the prisoner; the half-crazed, half-demoniac aspect of the girls; the wild, excited crowd; thehorror, rage, and pallid exasperation of Lawson, Goodman Fuller andothers, also of the relatives and friends of Burroughs's two formerwives, as the deep damnation of their taking off and the secrets oftheir bloody graves were being brought to light; and the child on thestand telling her awful tale of ghosts in winding-sheets, with napkinsround their heads, pointing to their death-wounds, and saying that"their blood did cry for vengeance" upon their murderer. The prisonerstands alone: all were raving around him, while he is amazed;astounded at such folly and wrong in others, and humbly sensible ofhis own unworthiness; bowed down under the mysterious Providence, thatpermitted such things for a season, yet strong and steadfast inconscious innocence and uprightness. 

To complete the proceedings against Burroughs at this time, and raiseto the highest point the public abhorrence of him, effective use wasmade of Deliverance Hobbs, the wife of William Hobbs, of whom I havespoken before. She was first examined April 22. During the earlierpart of the proceedings, she maintained her integrity and protestedher innocence in a manner which shows that her self-possession heldgood. But the examination was protracted; her strength was exhausted;the declarations of the accusers, their dreadful sufferings, theprejudgment of the case against her by the magistrates, and thecombined influences of all the circumstances around her, broke herdown. Her firmness, courage, and truth fled; and she began to confessall that was laid to her charge. The record is interesting as showinghow gradually she was overwhelmed and overcome. But while mentioningthe names of others whom she pretended to have been associated with aswitches, she did not speak of Burroughs. She referred to those who hadbeen brought out before that date, but not to him. The intendedmovement against him had not then been divulged. On the 3d of May, theday before he arrived, after it was known that officers had been sentto arrest him, she was examined again. On this occasion, she chargedBurroughs with having been present, and taken a leading part inwitch-meetings, which she had described in detail, at her firstexamination, without mentioning him at all. This proves that theconfessing prisoners were apprised of what it was desired they shouldsay, and that their testimony was prepared for them by the managers ofthe affair. The following is one of the confessions made by thiswoman, subsequent to her public examination. I give it partly to showwhat a flood of falsehood was poured upon Burroughs, and partlybecause it will serve as a specimen of the stuff of which theconfessions were composed:--

 "_The First Examination of Deliverance Hobbs in Prison. _--She continued in the free acknowledging herself to be a covenant witch: and further confesseth she was warned to a meeting yesterday morning, and that there was present Procter and his wife, Goody Nurse, Giles Corey and his wife, Goody Bishop alias Oliver; and Mr. Burroughs was their preacher, and pressed them to bewitch all in the village, telling them they should do it gradually, and not all at once, assuring them they should prevail. He administered the sacrament unto them at the same time, with red bread and red wine like blood. She affirms she saw Osburn, Sarah Good, Goody Wilds, Goody Nurse: and Goody Wilds distributed the bread and wine; and a man in a long-crowned white hat sat next the minister, and they sat seemingly at a table, and they filled out the wine in tankards. The notice of this meeting was given her by Goody Wilds. She, herself affirms, did not nor would not eat nor drink, but all the rest did, who were there present; therefore they threatened to torment her. The meeting was in the pasture by Mr. Parris's house, and she saw when Abigail Williams ran out to speak with them; but, by that time Abigail was come a little distance from the house, this examinant was struck blind, so that she saw not with whom Abigail spake. She further saith, that Goody Wilds, to prevail with her to sign, told her, that, if she would put her hand to the book, she would give her some clothes, and would not afflict her any more. Her daughter, Abigail Hobbs, being brought in at the same time, while her mother was present, was immediately taken with a dreadful fit; and her mother, being asked who it was that hurt her daughter, answered it was Goodman Corey, and she saw him and the gentlewoman of Boston striving to break her daughter's neck. "

On the next day, warrants were procured against George Jacobs, Sr. , and his grand-daughter, Margaret Jacobs. They were forthwith seizedand brought in by Constable Joseph Neal, of Salem, whose return is asfollows: "May 10, 1692. Then I apprehended the bodies of GeorgeJacobs, Sr. , and Margaret, daughter of George Jacobs, Jr. , accordingto the tenor of the above warrant. " The examinations, on thisoccasion, were held at the house of Thomas Beadle, in the town ofSalem. All the preliminary examinations, so far as existing documentsshow, were either in the meeting-house at the village or that of thetown; or at the house of Nathaniel Ingersoll at the village, or ThomasBeadle in the town, --both being inns, or places of publicentertainment. Beadle's house was on the south side of Essex Street, on land now occupied by Nos. 63 and 65. The eastern boundary of thelot was forty-nine feet from Ingersoll's Lane, now Daniels Street. Itsfront on Essex Street was about sixty feet, and its depth about onehundred and forty-five feet. What is now No. 65 is on the very spotwhere Beadle's tavern stood; and with the exception of six feet built, as an addition, on the eastern side, subsequently to 1733, is probablythe identical house. The ground now occupied by No. 63 was then anopen space. It appears by bills of expenses brought "against thecountry, " that the inn of Samuel Beadle, a brother of Thomas, was alsosometimes used for purposes connected with the prosecutions. ThomasBeadle's bill amounted to £58. 11_s. _ 5_d. _; that of Samuel to £21. The latter, being near the jail, was probably used for theentertainment of constables and the keeping of their horses, as wellas other incidental purposes connected with the transportation ofprisoners. 

A tradition has long prevailed, that the house, still standing, ofJudge Jonathan Corwin, at the western corner of North and EssexStreets, was used at these examinations. One form in which thistradition has come down is probably correct. The grand jury was oftenin session while the jury for trials was hearing cases in theCourt-house. There may not have been suitable accommodations for bothin that building. The confused sounds and commotions incident to thetrials would have been annoying to the grand jury. The tradition is, that a place was provided and used temporarily by that body, in theCorwin house, supposed to have been the spacious room at thesoutheastern corner. As the investigations of the grand jury were notopen to the public, its occasional sittings would not be seriouslyincompatible with the convenience of a family, or detrimental to thegrounds or apartments of a handsome private residence. Indeed, itwould hardly have been allowable or practicable to have had theexaminations before the magistrates in any other than a public house. They were always frequented by a promiscuous crowd, and generallyscenes of tumultuary disorder. 

George Jacobs, Sr. , was an aged man. He is represented in the evidenceas "very gray-headed;" and he must have been quite infirm, for hewalked with two staffs. His hair was in long, thin, white locks; and, as he was uncommonly tall of stature, he must have had a venerableaspect. Perhaps he was the "man in a long-crowned white hat, " referredto by Deliverance Hobbs. The examination shows that his faculties werevigorous, his bearing fearless, and his utterances strong and decided. The magistrates began: "Here are them that accuse you of acts ofwitchcraft. "--"Well, let us hear who are they and what are they. " WhenAbigail Williams testified against him, going through undoubtedly herusual operations, he could not refrain from expressing his contemptfor the whole thing by a laugh; explaining it by saying, "Because I amfalsely accused--your worships all of you, do you think this is true?"They answered, "Nay: what do you think?" "I never did it. "--"Who didit?"--"Don't ask me. " The magistrates always took it for granted thatthe pretensions and sufferings of the girls were real, and threw uponthe accused the responsibility of explaining them. They continued:"Why should we not ask you? Sarah Churchill accuseth you. There sheis. " Jacobs was of opinion that it was not for him to explain theactions of the girls, but for the prosecuting party to prove hisguilt. "If you can prove that I am guilty, I will lie under it. " ThenSarah Churchill, who was a servant in his family, said, "Last night, Iwas afflicted at Deacon Ingersoll's; and Mary Walcot said it was a manwith two staves: it was my master. " It seems, that, after theproceedings against Burroughs were over, a meeting of "the circle"took place in the evening, at Deacon Ingersoll's, at which there wasa repetition of the actings of the girls; and that Mary Walcotsuggested to Churchill to accuse her master. This shows the way inwhich the delusion was kept up. Probably, such meetings were held atone house or another in the village, and fresh accusations broughtforward, continually. Jacobs appealed to the magistrates, trying torecall them to a sense of fairness. "Pray, do not accuse me: I am asclear as your worships. You must do right judgment. " Sarah Churchillcharged him with having hurt her; and the magistrates, pushing her onto make further charges, said to her, "Did he not appear on the otherside of the river, and hurt you? Did not you see him?" She answered, "Yes, he did. " Then, turning to him, the magistrates said, "There, sheaccuseth you to your face: she chargeth you that you hurt hertwice. "--"It is not true. What would you have me say? I never wrongedno man in word nor deed. "--"Is it no harm to afflict these?"--"I neverdid it. "--"But how comes it to be in your appearance?"--"The Devil cantake any likeness. "--"Not without their consent. " Jacobs rejected theimputation. "You tax me for a wizard: you may as well tax me for abuzzard. I have done no harm. " Churchill said, "I know you lived awicked life. " Jacobs, turning to the magistrates, said, "Let her makeit out. " The magistrates asked her, "Doth he ever pray in his family?"She replied, "Not unless by himself. " The magistrates, addressing him:"Why do you not pray in your family?"--"I cannot read. "--"Well, butyou may pray for all that. Can you say the Lord's Prayer? Let us hearyou. " The reporter, Mr. Parris, says, "He missed in several parts ofit, and could not repeat it right after many trials. " The magistrates, addressing her, said, "Were you not frighted, Sarah Churchill, whenthe representation of your master came to you?"--"Yes. " Jacobsexclaimed, "Well, burn me or hang me, I will stand in the truth ofChrist: I know nothing of it. " In answer to an inquiry from themagistrates, he denied having done any thing to get his son George orgrand-daughter Margaret to "sign the book. "

The appearance of the old man, his intrepid bearing, and the stamp ofconscious innocence on all he said, probably produced some impressionon the magistrates, as they did not come to any decision, butadjourned the examination to the next day. The girls then came downfrom the village in full force, determined to put him through. When hewas brought in, they accordingly, all at once, "fell into the mostgrievous fits and screechings. " When they sufficiently came to, themagistrates turned to the girls: "Is this the man that hurts you?"They severally answered, --Abigail Williams: "This is the man, " andfell into a violent fit. Ann Putnam: "This is the man. He hurts me, and brings the book to me, and would have me write in the book, andsaid, if I would write in it, I should be as well as hisgrand-daughter. " Mercy Lewis, after much interruptions by fits: "Thisis the man: he almost kills me. " Elizabeth Hubbard: "He never hurt metill to-day, when he came upon the table. " Mary Walcot, after muchinterruption by fits: "This is the man: he used to come with twostaves, and beat me with one of them. " After all this, themagistrates, thinking he could deny it no longer, turn to him, "Whatdo you say? Are you not a witch?" "No: I know it not, if I were to diepresently. " Mercy Lewis advanced towards him, but, as soon as she gotnear, "fell into great fits. "--"What do you say to this?" cried themagistrates. "Why, it is false. I know not of it any more than thechild that was born to-night. " The reporter says, "Ann Putnam andAbigail Williams had each of them a pin stuck in their hands, and theysaid it was this old Jacobs. " He was committed to prison. 

The following piece of evidence is among the loose papers on file inthe clerk's office:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF SARAH INGERSOLL, aged about thirty years. --Saith, that, seeing Sarah Churchill after her examination, she came to me crying and wringing her hands, seemingly to be much troubled in spirit. I asked her what she ailed. She answered, she had undone herself. I asked her in what. She said, in belying herself and others in saying she had set her hand to the Devil's book, whereas, she said, she never did. I told her I believed she had set her hand to the book. She answered, crying, and said, 'No, no, no: I never, I never did. ' I asked her then what made her say she did. She answered, because they threatened her, and told her they would put her into the dungeon, and put her along with Mr. Burroughs; and thus several times she followed me up and down, telling me that she had undone herself, in belying herself and others. I asked her why she did not deny she wrote it. She told me, because she had stood out so long in it, that now she durst not. She said also, that, if she told Mr. Noyes but once she had set her hand to the book, he would believe her; but, if she told the truth, and said she had not set her hand to the book a hundred times, he would not believe her. 

 "SARAH INGERSOLL. "

This paper has also the signature of "Ann Andrews. "

This incident probably occurred during the examination of GeorgeJacobs; and the bitter compunction of Churchill was in consequence ofthe false and malignant course she had been pursuing against her oldmaster. It is a relief to our feelings, so far as she is regarded, tosuppose so. Bad as her conduct was as one of the accusers, on otheroccasions after I am sorry to say as well as before, it shows that shewas not entirely dead to humanity, but realized the iniquity of whichshe had been guilty towards him. It is the only instance of which wefind notice of any such a remnant of conscience showing itself, at thetime, among those perverted and depraved young persons. The reason, why it is probable that this exhibition of Churchill's penitentialtears and agonies of remorse occurred immediately after the first dayof Jacobs's examination, is this. It was one of the first, if not thefirst, held at the house of Thomas Beadle. Sarah Ingersoll would nothave been likely to have fallen in with her elsewhere. It is evident, from the tenor and purport of the document, that the deponent was notentirely carried away by the prevalent delusion, and probably did notfollow up the proceedings generally. But it was quite natural that herattention should have been called to proceedings of interest atBeadle's house, particularly on that first occasion. She lived in theimmediate vicinity. The indorsement by Ann Andrews, the daughter ofJacobs, increases the probability that the occurrence was at hisexamination. 

The representatives of the family of John Ingersoll, --a brother ofDeacon Nathaniel Ingersoll, --in 1692, occupied a series of houses onthe west side of Daniels Street, leading from Essex Street to theharbor. The widow of John's son Nathaniel lived at the corner of Essexand Daniels Streets; the next in order was the widow of his son John;the next, his daughter Ruth, wife of Richard Rose; the next, the widowof his son Richard; the last, his son Samuel, whose house lot extendedto the water. Sarah, the witness in this case, was the wife of Samuel, and afterwards became the second wife of Philip English. One of herchildren appears to have married a son of Beadle. Their immediateproximity to the Beadle house, and consequent intimacy with hisfamily, led them to become conversant with what occurred there; andSarah Ingersoll was, in that way, likely to meet Churchill, and tohave the conversation with her to which she deposes. 

This brief deposition of Sarah Ingersoll is, in many particulars, animportant and instructive paper. It exhibits incidentally the meansemployed to keep the accusing girls and confessing witnesses fromfalling back, and, by overawing them, to prevent their acknowledgingthe falseness of their testimony. It shows how difficult it was toobtain a hearing, if they were disposed to recant. It presents Mr. Noyes--as all along there is too much evidence compelling us toadmit--acting a part as bad as that of Parris; and it discloses thefact, that Mr. Burroughs, although not yet brought to trial, wasimmured in a dungeon. 

No papers are on file, or have been obtained, in reference to theexamination of Margaret Jacobs, which was at the same time and placewith that of her grandfather. We shall hear of her in subsequentstages of the transaction. 

On the same day--May 10--that George and Margaret Jacobs wereapprehended and examined, a warrant was issued against John Willard, "husbandman, " to be brought to Thomas Beadle's house in Salem. On the12th, John Putnam, Jr. , constable, made return that he had been to"the house of the usual abode of John Willard, and made search forhim, and in several other houses and places, but could not find him;"and that "his relations and friends" said, "that, to their bestknowledge, he was fled. " On the 15th, a warrant was issued to themarshal of Essex, and the constables of Salem, "or any other marshal, or marshal's constable or constables within this their majesty'scolony or territory of the Massachusetts, in New England, " requiringthem to apprehend said Willard, "if he may be found in yourprecincts, who stands charged with sundry acts of witchcraft, by himdone or committed on the bodies of Bray Wilkins, and Samuel Wilkins, the son of Henry Wilkins, " and others, upon complaint made "by ThomasFuller, Jr. , and Benjamin Wilkins, Sr. , yeomen; who, being found, youare to convey from town to town, from constable to constable, ... Tobe prosecuted according to the direction of Constable John Putnam, ofSalem Village, who goes with the same. " On the 18th of May, ConstablePutnam brought in Willard, and delivered him to the magistrates. Hewas seized in Groton. There is no record of his examination; but wegather, from the papers on file, the following facts relating to thisinteresting case:--

It is said that Willard had been called upon to aid in the arrest, custody, and bringing-in of persons accused, acting as adeputy-constable; and, from his observation of the deportment of theprisoners, and from all he heard and saw, his sympathies becameexcited in their behalf: and he expressed, in more or less unguardedterms, his disapprobation of the proceedings. He seems to haveconsidered all hands concerned in the business--accusers, accused, magistrates, and people--as alike bewitched. One of the witnessesagainst him deposed, that he said, in a "discourse" at the house of arelative, "Hang them: they are all witches. " In consequence of thiskind of talk, in which he indulged as early as April, he incurred theill-will of the parties engaged in the prosecutions; and it waswhispered about that he was himself in the diabolical confederacy. Hewas a grandson of Bray Wilkins; and the mind of the old man becameprejudiced against him, and most of his family connections andneighbors partook of the feeling. When Willard discovered that suchrumors were in circulation against him, he went to his grandfather forcounsel and the aid of his prayers. He met with a cold reception, asappears by the deposition of the old man as follows:--

 "When John Willard was first complained of by the afflicted persons for afflicting of them, he came to my house, greatly troubled, desiring me, with some other neighbors, to pray for him. I told him I was then going from home, and could not stay; but, if I could come home before night, I should not be unwilling. But it was near night before I came home, and so I did not answer his desire; but I heard no more of him upon that account. Whether my not answering his desire did not offend him, I cannot tell; but I was jealous, afterwards, that it did. "

Willard soon after made an engagement to go to Boston, onelection-week, with Henry Wilkins, Jr. A son of said Henry Wilkins, named Daniel, --a youth of seventeen years of age, who had heard thestories against Willard, and believed them all, remonstrated with hisfather against going to Boston with Willard, and seemed muchdistressed at the thought, saying, among other things, "It were wellif the said Willard were hanged. "

Old Bray Wilkins must go to election too; and so started off onhorseback, --the only mode of travel then practicable from Will's Hillto Winnesimit Ferry, --with his wife on a pillion behind him. He waseighty-two years of age, and she probably not much less; for she hadbeen the wife of his youth. The old couple undoubtedly had an activetime that week in Boston. It was a great occasion, and the wholecountry flocked in to partake in the ceremonies and services of theanniversary. On Election-day, with his wife, he rode out toDorchester, to dine at the house of his "brother, Lieutenant RichardWay. " Deodat Lawson and his new wife, and several more, joined them attable. Before sitting down, Henry Wilkins and John Willard also camein. Willard, perhaps, did not feel very agreeably towards hisgrandfather, at the time, for having shown an unwillingness to praywith him. The old man either saw, or imagined he saw, a veryunpleasant expression in Willard's countenance. "To my apprehension, he looked after such a sort upon me as I never before discerned inany. " The long and hard travel, the fatigues and excitements ofelection-week, were too much for the old man, tough and rugged as hewas; and a severe attack of a complaint, to which persons of his ageare often subject, came on. He experienced great sufferings, and, ashe expressed it, "was like a man on a rack. "

 "I told my wife immediately that I was afraid that Willard had done me wrong; my pain continuing, and finding no relief, my jealousy continued. Mr. Lawson and others there were all amazed, and knew not what to do for me. There was a woman accounted skilful came hoping to help me, and after she had used means, she asked me whether none of those evil persons had done me damage. I said, I could not say they had, but I was sore afraid they had. She answered, she did fear so too.... As near as I remember. I lay in this case three or four days at Boston, and afterward, with the jeopardy of my life (as I thought), I came home. "

On his return, he found his grandson, the same Daniel who had warnedHenry Wilkins against going to Boston with John Willard, on hisdeath-bed, in great suffering. Another attack of his own malady cameon. There was great consternation in the neighborhood, and throughoutthe village. The Devil and his confederates, it was thought, weremaking an awful onslaught upon the people at Will's Hill. Parris andothers rushed to the scene. Mercy Lewis and Mary Walcot were carriedup to tell who it was that was bewitching old Bray, and young Daniel, and others of the Wilkinses who had caught the contagion, and wereexperiencing or imagining all sorts of bodily ails. They were taken tothe room where Daniel was approaching his death-agonies; and they bothaffirmed, that they saw the spectres of old Mrs. Buckley and JohnWillard "upon his throat and upon his breast, and pressed him andchoked him;" and the cruel operation, they insisted upon it, continueduntil the boy died. The girls were carried to the bedroom of the oldman, who was in great suffering; and, when they entered, the questionwas put by the anxious and excited friends in the chamber to MercyLewis, whether she saw any thing. She said, "Yes: they are lookingfor John Willard. " Presently she pretended to have caught sight of hisapparition, and exclaimed, "There he is upon his grandfather's belly. "This was thought wonderful indeed; for, as the old man says in adeposition he drew up afterwards, "At that time I was in grievous painin the small of my belly. "

Mrs. Ann Putnam had her story to tell about John Willard. Itssubstance is seen in a deposition drawn up about the time, and is inthe same vein as her testimony in other cases; presenting a problem tobe solved by those who can draw the line between semi-insanehallucination and downright fabrication. Her deposition is asfollows:--

 "That the shape of Samuel Fuller and Lydia Wilkins this day told me at my own house by the bedside, who appeared in winding-sheets, that, if I did not go and tell Mr. Hathorne that John Willard had murdered them, they would tear me to pieces. I knew them when they were living, and it was exactly their resemblance and shape. And, at the same time, the apparition of John Willard told me that he had killed Samuel Fuller, Lydia Wilkins, Goody Shaw, and Fuller's second wife, and Aaron Way's child, and Ben Fuller's child; and this deponent's child Sarah, six weeks old; and Philip Knight's child, with the help of William Hobbs; and Jonathan Knight's child and two of Ezekiel Cheever's children with the help of William Hobbs; Anne Eliot and Isaac Nichols with the help of William Hobbs; and that if Mr. Hathorne would not believe them, --that is, Samuel Fuller and Lydia Wilkins, --perhaps they would appear to the magistrates. Joseph Fuller's apparition the same day also came to me, and told me that Goody Corey had killed him. The spectre aforesaid told me, that vengeance, vengeance, was cried by said Fuller. This relation is true. 

 "ANN PUTNAM. "

It appears by such papers as are to be found relating to Willard'scase, that a coroner's jury was held over the body of Daniel Wilkins, of which Nathaniel Putnam was foreman. It is much to be regretted thatthe finding of that jury is lost. It would be a real curiosity. Thatit was very decisive to the point, affirmed by Mercy Lewis and MaryWalcot, that Daniel was choked and strangled by the spectres of JohnWillard and Goody Buckley, is apparent from the manner in which BrayWilkins speaks of it. In an argument between him and some persons whowere expressing their confidence that John Willard was an innocentman, he sought to relieve himself from responsibility for Willard'sconviction by saying, "It was not I, nor my son Benjamin Wilkins, butthe testimony of the afflicted persons, and the jury concerning themurder of my grandson, Daniel Wilkins, that would take away his life, if any thing did. " Mr. Parris, of course, was in the midst of theseproceedings at Will's Hill; attended the visits of the afflicted girlswhen they went to ascertain who were the witches murdering youngDaniel and torturing the old man; was present, no doubt, at the solemnexaminations and investigations of the sages who sat as a jury ofinquest over the former, and, in all likelihood, made, as usual, awritten report of the same. As soon as he got back to his house, hedischarged his mind, and indorsed the verdict of the coroner's jury bythis characteristic insertion in his church-records: "Dan: Wilkins. Bewitched to death. " The very next entry relates to a case of whichthis obituary line, in Mr. Parris's church-book, is the onlyintimation that has come down to us, "Daughter to Ann Douglas. Bywitchcraft, I doubt not. " Willard's examination was at Beadle's, onthe 18th. With this deluge of accusations and tempest of indignationbeating upon him, he had but little chance, and was committed. 

While the marshals and constables were in pursuit of Willard, the timewas well improved by the prosecutors. On the 12th of May, warrantswere issued to apprehend, and bring "forthwith" before the magistratessitting at Beadle's, "Alice Parker, the wife of John Parker of Salem;and Ann Pudeator of Salem, widow. " Alice, commonly called Elsie, Parker was the wife of a mariner. We know but little of her. We have adeposition of one woman, Martha Dutch, as follows:--

 "This deponent testified and saith, that, about two years last past, John Jarman, of Salem, coming in from sea, I (this deponent and Alice Parker, of Salem, both of us standing together) said unto her, 'What a great mercy it was, for to see them come home well; and through mercy, ' I said, 'my husband had gone, and come home well, many times. ' And I, this deponent, did say unto the said Parker, that 'I did hope he would come home this voyage well also. ' And the said Parker made answer unto me, and said, 'No: never more in this world. ' The which came to pass as she then told me; for he died abroad, as I certainly hear. "

Perhaps Parker had information which had not reached the ears ofDutch, or she may have been prone to take melancholy views of thedangers to which seafaring people are exposed. It was a strange kindof evidence to be admitted against a person in a trial for witchcraft. 

Samuel Shattuck, who has been mentioned (vol. I. P. 193) in connectionwith Bridget Bishop, had a long story to tell about Alice Parker. Heseems to have been very active in getting up charges of witchcraftagainst persons in his neighborhood, and on the most absurd andfrivolous grounds. Parker had made a friendly call upon his wife; and, not long after, one of his children fell sick, and he undertook tosuspect that it was "under an evil hand. " In similar circumstances, hetook the same grudge against Bridget Bishop. Alice Parker, hearingthat he had been circulating suspicions to that effect against her, went to his house to remonstrate; an angry altercation took placebetween them; and he gave his version of the affair in evidence. Therewas no one to present the other side. But the whole thing has, notonly a one-sided, but an irrelevant character, in no wise bearing uponthe point of witchcraft. All the gossip, scandal, and tittle-tattle ofthe neighborhood for twenty years back, in this case as in others, was raked up, and allowed to be adduced, however utterly remote fromthe questions belonging to the trial. 

The following singular piece of testimony against Alice Parker may bementioned. John Westgate was at Samuel Beadle's tavern one night withboon companions; among them John Parker, the husband of Alice. Shedisapproved of her husband's spending his evenings in such company, and in a bar-room; and felt it necessary to put a stop to it, if shecould. Westgate says that she "came into the company, and scolded atand called her husband all to nought; whereupon I, the said deponent, took her husband's part, telling her it was an unbeseeming thing forher to come after him to the tavern, and rail after that rate. Withthat she came up to me, and called me rogue, and bid me mind my ownbusiness, and told me I had better have said nothing. " He goes on tostate, that, returning home one night some time afterwards, heexperienced an awful fright. "Going from the house of Mr. Daniel King, when I came over against John Robinson's house, I heard a great noise;... And there appeared a black hog running towards me with open mouth, as though he would have devoured me at that instant time. " In theextremity of his terror, he tried to run away from the awful monster;but, as might have been expected under the circumstances, he tumbledto the ground. "I fell down upon my hip, and my knife run into my hipup to the haft. When I came home, my knife was in my sheath. When Idrew it out of the sheath, then immediately the sheath fell all topieces. " And further this deponent testifieth, that, after he got upfrom his fall, his stocking and shoe was full of blood, and that hewas forced to crawl along by the fence all the way home; and the hogfollowed him, and never left him till he came home. He further statedthat he was accompanied all the way by his "stout dog, " whichordinarily was much inclined to attack and "worry hogs, " but, on thisoccasion, "ran away from him, leaping over the fence and crying much. "In view of all these things, Westgate concludes his testimony thus:"Which hog I then apprehended was either the Devil or some evil thing, not a real hog; and did then really judge, or determine in my mind, that it was either Goody Parker or by her means and procuring, fearingthat she is a witch. " The facts were probably these: The sheath wasbroken by his fall, his skin bruised, and some blood got into hisstocking and shoe. The knife was never out of the sheath until he drewit; there was no mystery or witchcraft in it. Nothing was ever morenatural than the conduct of the dog. When he saw Westgate frightenedout of his wits at nothing, trying to run as for dear life when therewas no pursuer, staggering and pitching along in a zigzag directionwith very eccentric motions, falling heels over head, and thencrawling along, holding himself up by the fence, and all the timelooking back with terror, and perhaps attempting to express hisconsternation, the dog could not tell what to make of it; and ran off, as a dog would be likely to have done, jumping over the fences, barking, and uttering the usual canine ejaculations. Dogs sympathizewith their masters, and, if there is a frolic or other acting goingon, are fond of joining in it. The whole thing was in consequence ofWestgate's not having profited by Alice Parker's rebuke, anddiscontinued his visits by night to Beadle's bar-room. The only reasonwhy he saw the "black hog with the open mouth, " and the dog did notsee it, and therefore failed to come to his protection, was because hehad been drinking and the dog had not. 

We find among the papers relating to these transactions many otherinstances of this kind of testimony; sounds heard and sights seen bypersons going home at night through woods, after having spent theevening under the bewildering influences of talk about witches, Satan, ghosts, and spectres; sometimes, as in this case, stimulated by othercauses of excitement. 

Perhaps some persons may be curious to know the route by whichWestgate made out to reach his home, while pursued by the horrors ofthat midnight experience. He seems to have frequented Samuel Beadle'sbar-room. That old Narragansett soldier owned a lot on the west sideof St. Peter's Street, occupying the southern corner of what is nowChurch Street, which was opened ten years afterwards, that is, in1702, by the name of Epps's Lane. On that lot his tavern stood. Healso owned one-third of an acre at the present corner of Brown and St. Peter's Streets, on which he had a stable and barn; so that hisgrounds were on both sides of St. Peter's Street, --one parcel on thewest, nearly opposite the present front of the church; the other onthe east side of St. Peter's Street, opposite the south side of thechurch. From this locality Westgate started. He probably did not godown Brown Street, for that was then a dark, unfrequented lane, butthought it safest to get into Essex Street. He made his way along thatstreet, passing the Common, the southern side of which, at that time, with the exception of some house-lots on and contiguous to the site ofthe Franklin Building, bordered on Essex Street. The casualty of hisfall; the catastrophe to his hip, stocking, and shoe; and the witcherypractised upon his knife and its sheath, --occurred "over against JohnRobinson's house, " which was on the eastern corner of Pleasant andEssex Streets. Christopher Babbage's house, from which he thought the"great noise" came, was next beyond Robinson's. He crawled along thefences and the sides of the houses until he reached the passage-way onthe western side of Thomas Beadle's house, and through that managed toget to his own house, which was directly south of said Beadle's lot, between it and the harbor. 

There is one item in reference to Alice Parker, which indicates thatthe zeal of the prosecutors in her case, as in that of Mr. Burroughs, and perhaps others, was aggravated by a suspicion that she washeretical on some points of the prevalent creed of the day. Parrissays that "Mr. Noyes, at the time of her examination, affirmed to herface, that, he being with her at a time of sickness, discoursing withher about witchcraft, whether she were not guilty, she answered, 'ifshe was as free from other sins as from witchcraft, she would not askof the Lord mercy. '" The manner of expression in this passage showsthat it was thought that there was something very shocking in heranswer. Mr. Noyes "affirmed to her face. " No doubt it was thought thatshe denied the doctrine of original and transmitted, or imputed sin. 

Ann Pudeator (pronounced Pud-e-tor) was the widow of Jacob Pudeator, and probably about seventy years of age. The name is spelt variously, and was originally, as it is sometimes found, Poindexter. She was awoman of property, owning two estates on the north line of the Common;that on which she lived comprised what is between Oliver and WinterStreets. She was arrested and brought to examination on the 12th ofMay. There is ground to conclude, from the tenor of the documents, that she was then discharged. Some people in the town were determinedto gratify their spleen against her, and procured her re-arrest. Theexamination took place on the 2d of July, and she was then committed. The evidence was, if possible, more frivolous and absurd than in othercases. The girls acted their usual parts, giving, on this occasion, aparticularly striking exhibition of the transmission of the diabolicalvirus out of themselves back into the witch by a touch of her body. "Ann Putnam fell into a fit, and said Pudeator was commanded to takeher by the wrist, and did; and said Putnam was well presently. MaryWarren fell into two fits quickly, after one another; and both timeswas helped by said Pudeator's taking her by the wrist. "

When well acted, this must have been one of the most impressive andeffective of all the methods employed in these performances. To see ayoung woman or girl suddenly struck down, speechless, pallid as indeath; with muscles rigid, eyeballs fixed or rolled back in theirsockets; the stiffened frame either wholly prostrate or drawn up intocontorted attitudes and shapes, or vehemently convulsed with rackingpains, or dropping with relaxed muscles into a lifeless lump; and tohear dread shrieks of delirious ravings, --must have produced a trulyfrightful effect upon an excited and deluded assembly. The constablesand their assistants would go to the rescue, lift the body of thesufferer, and bear it in their arms towards the prisoner. Themagistrates and the crowd, hushed in the deepest silence, would watchwith breathless awe the result of the experiment, while the officersslowly approached the accused, who, when they came near, would, inobedience to the order of the magistrates, hold out a hand, and touchthe flesh of the afflicted one. Instantly the spasms cease, the eyesopen, color returns to the countenance, the limbs resume theirposition and functions, and life and intelligence are wholly restored. The sufferer comes to herself, walks back, and takes her seat as wellas ever. The effect upon the accused person must have beenconfounding. It is a wonder that it did not oftener break them down. It sometimes did. Poor Deliverance Hobbs, when the process was triedupon her, was wholly overcome, and passed from conscious and calmlyasserted innocence to a helpless abandonment of reason, conscience, and herself, exclaiming, "I am amazed! I am amazed!" and assentedafterwards to every charge brought against her, and said whatever shewas told, or supposed they wished her to say. 

On the 14th of May, warrants were issued against Daniel Andrew; GeorgeJacobs, Jr. ; his wife, Rebecca Jacobs; Sarah Buckley, wife of WilliamBuckley; and Mary Whittredge, daughter of said Buckley, --all of SalemVillage; Elizabeth Hart, wife of Isaac Hart, of Lynn; Thomas Farrar, Sr. , also of Lynn; Elizabeth Colson, of Reading; and Bethiah Carter, of Woburn. There is nothing of special interest among the few papersthat are on file relating to Hart, Colson, or Carter. The constablemade return that he had searched the houses of Daniel Andrew andGeorge Jacobs, Jr. , but could not find them. He brought in forthwiththe bodies of Sarah Buckley, Mary Whittredge, and Rebecca Jacobs. Farrar and the rest were brought in shortly afterwards. 

Daniel Andrew was one of the leading men of the village, and thewarrant against him was proof that soon none would be too high to bereached by the prosecutors. He felt that it was in vain to attempt toresist their destructive power; and, getting notice in some way of theapproach of the constable, with his near neighbor, friend, andconnection, George Jacobs, Jr. , effected his escape, and found refugein a foreign country. 

Rebecca, the wife of George Jacobs, Jr. , was the victim of a partialderangement. Her daughter Margaret was already in jail. Her husbandhad escaped by a hurried flight, and his father was in prison awaitinghis trial. She was left in a lonely and unprotected condition, in acountry but thinly settled, in the midst of woods. The constable camewith his warrant for her. She was driven to desperation, and wasinclined to resist; but he persuaded her to go with him by holding outthe inducement that she would soon be permitted to return. Four youngchildren, one of them an infant, were left in the house; but those whowere old enough to walk followed after, crying, endeavoring toovertake her. Some of the neighbors took them into their houses. Theimprisonment of a woman in her situation and mental condition was anoutrage; but she was kept in irons, as they all were, for eightmonths. Her mother addressed an humble but earnest and touchingpetition to the chief-justice of the court at Salem, setting forth herdaughter's condition; but it was of no avail. Afterwards, sheaddressed a similar memorial to "His Excellency Sir William Phips, Knight, Governor, and the Honorable Council sitting at Boston, " in thefollowing terms:--

 "_The Humble Petition of Rebecca Fox, of Cambridge, showeth_, that, whereas Rebecca Jacobs (daughter of your humble petitioner) has, a long time, --even many months, --now lain in prison for witchcraft, and is well known to be a person crazed, distracted, and broken in mind, your humble petitioner does most humbly and earnestly seek unto Your Excellency and to Your Honors for relief in this case. 

 "Your petitioner, --who knows well the condition of her poor daughter, --together with several others of good repute and credit, are ready to offer their oaths, that the said Jacobs is a woman crazed, distracted, and broken in her mind; and that she has been so these twelve years and upwards. 

 "However, for (I think) above this half-year, the said Jacobs has lain in prison, and yet remains there, attended with many sore difficulties. 

 "Christianity and nature do each of them oblige your petitioner to be very solicitous in this matter; and, although many weighty cases do exercise your thoughts, yet your petitioner can have no rest in her mind till such time as she has offered this her address on behalf of her daughter. 

 "Some have died already in prison, and others have been dangerously sick; and how soon others, and, among them, my poor child, by the difficulties of this confinement may be sick and die, God only knows. 

 "She is uncapable of making that shift for herself that others can do; and such are her circumstances, on other accounts, that your petitioner, who is her tender mother, has many great sorrows, and almost overcoming burdens, on her mind upon her account; but, in the midst of all her perplexities and troubles (next to supplicating to a good and merciful God), your petitioner has no way for help but to make this her afflicted condition known unto you. So, not doubting but Your Excellency and Your Honors will readily hear the cries and groans of a poor distressed woman, and grant what help and enlargement you may, your petitioner heartily begs God's gracious presence with you; and subscribes herself, in all humble manner, your sorrowful and distressed petitioner, REBECCA FOX. "

No heed was paid to this petition; and the unfortunate woman remainedin jail until--after the delusion had passed from the minds of thepeople--a grand jury found a bill against her, on which she wasbrought to trial, Jan. 3, 1693, and acquitted. There is no moredisgraceful feature in all the proceedings than the long imprisonmentof this woman, her being brought to trial, and the obdurate deafnessto humanity and reason of the chief-justice, the governor, and thecouncil. 

No papers are found relating to the examination of Thomas Farrar; butthe following deposition shows the manner in which prosecutions weregot up:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF ANN PUTNAM, who testifieth and saith, that, on the 8th of May, 1692, there appeared to me the apparition of an old, gray-headed man, with a great nose, which tortured me, and almost choked me, and urged me to write in his book; and I asked him what was his name, and from whence he came, for I would complain of him; and he told me he came from Lynn, and people do call him 'old Father Pharaoh;' and he said he was my grandfather, for my father used to call him father: but I told him I would not call him grandfather; for he was a wizard, and I would complain of him. And, ever since, he hath afflicted me by times, beating me and pinching me and almost choking me, and urging me continually to write in his book. "

 "We, whose names are underwritten, having been conversant with Ann Putnam, have heard her declare what is above written, --what she said she saw and heard from the apparition of old Pharaoh, --and also have seen her tortures, and perceived her hellish temptations, by her loud outcries, 'I will not write, old Pharaoh, --I will not write in your book. '

 THOMAS PUTNAM, ROBERT MORRELL. "

She had heard this person spoken of as "old Father Pharaoh, " with his"great nose;" and, from a mere spirit of mischief, --for the fun of thething, --cried out upon him. Many of the documents exhibit a levity ofspirit among these girls, which show how hardened and reckless theyhad become. The following depositions are illustrative of this stateof mind among them:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF CLEMENT COLDUM, aged sixty years, or thereabout. --Saith that, on the 29th of May, 1692, being at Salem Village, carrying home Elizabeth Hubbard from the meeting behind me, she desired me to ride faster. I asked her why. She said the woods were full of devils, and said, 'There!' and 'There they be!' but I could see none. Then I put on my horse; and, after I had ridden a while, she told me I might ride softer, for we had outridden them. I asked her if she was not afraid of the Devil. She answered me, 'No: she could discourse with the Devil as well as with me, ' and further saith not. This I am ready to testify on oath, if called thereto, as witness my hand. 

 "CLEMENT COLDUM. "

 "THE TESTIMONY OF DANIEL ELLIOT, aged twenty-seven years or thereabouts, who testifieth and saith, that I, being at the house of Lieutenant Ingersoll, on the 28th of March, in the year 1692, there being present one of the afflicted persons, who cried out and said, 'There's Goody Procter. ' William Raymond, Jr. , being there present, told the girl he believed she lied, for he saw nothing. Then Goody Ingersoll told the girl she told a lie, for there was nothing. Then the girl said she did it for sport, --they must have some sport. "

Sarah Buckley was examined May 18, and her daughter Mary Whittredgeprobably on the same day. We have Parris's report of the proceedingsin reference to the former. The only witnesses against her were theafflicted children. They performed their grand operation of going intofits, and being carried to the accused and subjected to her touch; AnnPutnam, Susanna Sheldon, and Mary Warren enacting the part insuccession. Sheldon cried out, "There is the black man whispering inher ear!" The magistrates and all beholders were convinced. She wascommitted to prison, and remained in irons for eight months before atrial, which resulted in her acquittal. So eminently excellent was thecharacter of Goodwife Buckley, that her arrest and imprisonment led toexpressions in her favor as honorable to those who had the courage toutter them as to her. The following certificates were given, previousto her trial, by ministers in the neighborhood:--

 "These are to certify whom it may or shall concern, that I have known Sarah, the wife of William Buckley, of Salem Village, more or less, ever since she was brought out of England, which is above fifty years ago; and, during all that time, I never knew nor heard of any evil in her carriage, or conversation unbecoming a Christian: likewise, she was bred up by Christian parents all the time she lived here at Ipswich. I further testify, that the said Sarah was admitted as a member into the church of Ipswich above forty years since; and that I never heard from others, or observed by myself, any thing of her that was inconsistent with her profession or unsuitable to Christianity, either in word, deed, or conversation, and am strangely surprised that any person should speak or think of her as one worthy to be suspected of any such crime that she is now charged with. In testimony hereof I have here set my hand this 20th of June, 1692. 

 WILLIAM HUBBARD. "

 "Being desired by Goodman Buckley to give my testimony to his wife's conversation before this great calamity befell her, I cannot refuse to bear witness to the truth; viz. , that, during the time of her living in Salem for many years in communion with this church, having occasionally frequent converse and discourse with her, I have never observed myself, nor heard from any other, any thing that was unsuitable to a conversation becoming the gospel, and have always looked upon her as a serious, Godly woman. 

 "JOHN HIGGINSON. "

 "Marblehead, Jan. 2, 1692/3. --Upon the same request, having had the like opportunity by her residence many years at Marblehead, I can do no less than give the alike testimony for her pious conversation during her abode in this place and communion with us. 

 SAMUEL CHEEVER. "

William Hubbard was the venerable minister of Ipswich, described byHutchinson as "a man of learning, and of a candid and benevolentmind, accompanied with a good degree of catholicism. " He is describedby another writer as "a man of singular modesty, learned withoutostentation. " He will be remembered with honor for his long anddevoted service in the Christian ministry, and as the historian of NewEngland and of the Indian wars. 

John Higginson was worthy of the title of the "Nestor of theNew-England clergy. " He was at this time seventy-six years old, andhad been a preacher of the gospel fifty-five years. For thirty-threeyears he had been pastor of the First Church in Salem, of which hisfather was the first preacher. No character, in all our annals, shineswith a purer lustre. John Dunton visited him in 1686, and thus speaksof him: "All men look to him as a common father; and old age, for hissake, is a reverend thing. He is eminent for all the graces that adorna minister. His very presence puts vice out of countenance; hisconversation is a glimpse of heaven. " The fact, that, while hiscolleague, Nicholas Noyes, took so active and disastrous a part in theprosecutions, he, at an early stage, discountenanced them, shows thathe was a person of discrimination and integrity. That he did notconceal his disapprobation of the proceedings is demonstrated, notonly by the tenor of his attestation in behalf of Goodwife Buckley, but by the decisive circumstance that the "afflicted children" criedout against his daughter Anna, the wife of Captain William Dolliver, of Gloucester; got a warrant to apprehend her; and had her brought tothe Salem jail, and committed as a witch. They never struck atfriends, but were sure to punish all who were suspected to disapproveof the proceedings. How long Mrs. Dolliver remained in prison we arenot informed. But it was impossible to break down the influence orindependence of Mr. Higginson. It is not improbable that he believedin witchcraft, with all the other divines of his day; but he fearednot to bear testimony to personal worth, and could not be brought toco-operate in violence, or fall in with the spirit of persecution. Theweight of his character compelled the deference of the most heatedzealots, and even Cotton Mather himself was eager to pay him homage. Four years afterwards, he thus writes of him: "This good old man isyet alive; and he that, from a child, knew the Holy Scriptures, does, at those years wherein men use to be twice children, continuepreaching them with such a manly, pertinent, and judicious vigor, andwith so little decay of his intellectual abilities, as is indeed amatter of just admiration. "

Samuel Cheever was a clergyman of the highest standing, and held inuniversal esteem through a long life. 

From passages incidentally given, it has appeared that it was quitecommon, in those times, to attribute accidents, injuries, pains, anddiseases of all kinds, to an "evil hand. " It was not confined to thislocality. When, however, the public mind had become excited to soextraordinary a degree by circumstances connected with theprosecutions in 1692, this tendency of the popular credulity was verymuch strengthened. Believing that the sufferer or patient was thevictim of the malignity of Satan, and it also being a doctrine of theestablished belief that he could not act upon human beings or affairsexcept through the instrumental agency of some other human beings inconfederacy with him, the question naturally arose, in every specificinstance, Who is the person in this diabolical league, and doing thewill of the Devil in this case? Who is the witch? It may well besupposed, that the suffering person, and all surrounding friends, would be most earnest and anxious in pressing this question andseeking its solution. The accusing girls at the village were thoughtto possess the power to answer it. This gave them great importance, gratified their vanity and pride, and exalted them to the character ofprophetesses. They were ready to meet the calls made upon them in thiscapacity; would be carried to the room of a sick person; and, onentering it, would exclaim, on the first return of pain, or difficultyof respiration, or restless motion of the patient, "There she is!"There is such a one's appearance, choking or otherwise tormenting himor her. If the minds of the accusing girls had been led towards a newvictim, his or her name would be used, and a warrant issued for hisapprehension. If not, then the name of some one already in confinementwould be used on the occasion. It was also a received opinion, that, while ordinary fastenings would not prevent a witch from goingabroad, "in her apparition, " to any distance to afflict persons, aredoubling of them might. Whenever one of the accusing girls pretendedto see the spectres of persons already in jail afflicting any one, orders would forthwith be given to have them more heavily chained. Every once in a while, a wretched prisoner, already suffering frombonds and handcuffs, would be subjected to additional manacles andchains. This was one of the most cruel features in these proceedings. It is illustrated by the following document:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF BENJAMIN HUTCHINSON, who testifieth and saith, that my wife was much afflicted, presently after the last execution, with violent pains in her head and teeth, and all parts of her body; but, on sabbath day was fortnight in the morning, she being in such excessive misery that she said she believed that she had an evil hand upon her: whereupon I went to Mary Walcot, one of our next neighbors, to come and look to see if she could see anybody upon her; and, as soon as she came into the house, she said that our two next neighbors, Sarah Buckley and Mary Whittredge, were upon my wife. And immediately my wife had ease, and Mary Walcot was tormented. Whereupon I went down to the sheriff, and desired him to take some course with those women, that they might not have such power to torment: and presently he ordered them to be fettered, and, ever since that, my wife has been tolerable well; and I believe, in my heart, that Sarah Buckley and Mary Whittredge have hurt my wife and several others by acts of witchcraft. 

 "Benjamin Hutchinson owned the above-written evidence to be the truth, upon oath, before the grand inquest, 15-7, 1692. "

The evidence is quite conclusive, from considerations suggested by theforegoing document, and indications scattered through the papersgenerally, that all persons committed on the charge of witchcraft werekept heavily ironed, and otherwise strongly fastened. Only a few ofthe bills of expenses incurred are preserved. Among them we find thefollowing: For mending and putting on Rachel Clenton's fetters; onepair of fetters for John Howard; a pair of fetters each for JohnJackson, Sr. , and John Jackson, Jr. ; eighteen pounds of iron forfetters; for making four pair of iron fetters and two pair ofhandcuffs, and putting them on the legs and hands of Goodwife Cloyse, Easty, Bromidg, and Green; chains for Sarah Good and Sarah Osburn;shackles for ten prisoners; and one pair of irons for Mary Cox. Whenwe reflect upon the character of the prisoners generally, --many ofthem delicate and infirm, several venerable for their virtues as wellas years, --and that they were kept in this cruelly painful conditionfrom early spring to the middle of the next January, and the largerpart to the May of 1693, in the extremes of heat and cold, exposed tothe most distressing severities of both, crowded in narrow, dark, andnoisome jails under an accumulation of all their discomforts, restraints, privations, exposures, and abominations, our wonder is, not that many of them died, but that all did not break down in bodyand mind. 

Sarah Buckley and her daughter were not brought to trial until afterthe power of the prosecution to pursue to the death had ceased. Theywere acquitted in January, 1692. Their goods and chattels had all beenseized by the officers, as was the usual practice, at the time oftheir arrest. In humble circumstances before, it took their lastshilling to meet the charges of their imprisonment. They, as allothers, were required to provide their own maintenance while inprison; and, after trial and acquittal, were not discharged until allcosts were paid. Five pounds had to be raised, to satisfy the claimsof the officers of the court and of the jails, for each of them. Theresult was, the family was utterly impoverished. The poor old woman, with her aged husband, suffered much, there is reason to fear, fromabsolute want during all the rest of their days. Their truly Christianvirtues dignified their poverty, and secured the respect and esteem ofall good men. The Rev. Joseph Green has this entry in his diary: "Jan. 2, 1702. --Old William Buckley died this evening. He was at meeting thelast sabbath, and died with the cold, I fear, for want of comforts andgood tending. Lord forgive! He was about eighty years old. I visitedhim and prayed with him on Monday, and also the evening before hedied. He was very poor; but, I hope, had not his portion in thislife. " The ejaculation, "Lord forgive!" expresses the deep sense Mr. Green had, of which his whole ministry gave evidence, of theinexpressible sufferings and wrongs brought upon families by thewitchcraft prosecutions. The case of Sarah Buckley, her husband andfamily, was but one of many. The humble, harmless, innocent people whoexperienced that fearful and pitiless persecution had to drink of asbitter a cup as ever was permitted by an inscrutable Providence to bepresented to human lips. In reference to them, we feel as anassurance, what good Mr. Green humbly hoped, that "they had not theirportion in this life. " Those who went firmly, patiently, and calmlythrough that great trial without losing love or faith, are crownedwith glory and honor. 

The examination and commitment of Mary Easty, on the 21st of April, have already been described. For some reason, and in a way of which wehave no information, she was discharged from prison on the 18th ofMay, and wholly released. This seems to have been very distasteful tothe accusing girls. They were determined not to let it rest so; andput into operation their utmost energies to get her back toimprisonment. On the 20th of May, Mercy Lewis, being then at the houseof John Putnam, Jr. , was taken with fits, and experienced tortures ofunprecedented severity. The particular circumstances on this occasion, as gathered from various depositions, illustrate very strikingly theskilful manner in which the girls managed to produce the desiredeffect upon the public mind. 

Samuel Abbey, a neighbor, whether sent for or not we are not informed, went to John Putnam's house that morning, about nine o'clock. He foundMercy in a terrible condition, crying out with piteous tones ofanguish, "Dear Lord, receive my soul. "--"Lord, let them not kill mequite. "--"Pray for the salvation of my soul, for they will kill meoutright. " He was desired to go to Thomas Putnam's house to bring hisdaughter Ann, "to see if she could see who it was that hurt MercyLewis. " He found Abigail Williams with Ann, and they accompanied himback to John Putnam's. On the way, they both cried out that they sawthe apparition of Goody Easty afflicting Mercy Lewis. When theyreached the scene, they exclaimed, "There is Goody Easty and JohnWillard and Mary Whittredge afflicting the body of Mercy Lewis;" Mercyat the time laboring for breath, and appearing as choked andstrangled, convulsed, and apparently at the last gasp. "Thus, " saysAbbey, "she continued the greatest part of the day, in such torturesas no tongue can express. " Mary Walcot was sent for. Upon coming in, she cried out, "There is the apparition of Goody Easty choking MercyLewis, pressing upon her breasts with both her hands, and putting achain about her neck. " A message was then despatched for ElizabethHubbard. She, too, saw the shape of Goody Easty, "the very same womanthat was sent home the other day, " aided in her diabolical operationsby Willard and Whittredge, "torturing Mercy in a most dreadfulmanner. " Intelligence of the shocking sufferings of Mercy wascirculated far and wide, and people hurried to the spot from alldirections. Jonathan Putnam, James Darling, Benjamin Hutchinson, andSamuel Braybrook reached the house during the evening, and found Mercy"in a case as if death would have quickly followed. " Occasionally, Mercy would have a respite; and, at such intervals, Elizabeth Hubbardwould fill the gap. "These two fell into fits by turns; the one beingwell while the other was ill. " Each of them continued, all the while, crying out against Goody Easty, uttering in their trances vehementremonstrances against her cruel operations, representing her asbringing their winding-sheets and coffins, and threatening to killthem "if they would not sign to her book. " Their acting was socomplete that the bystanders seem to have thought that they heard thewords of Easty, as well as the responses of the girls; and that theysaw the "winding-sheet, coffin, " and "the book. " In the generalconsternation, Marshal Herrick was sent for. What he saw, heard, thought, and did, appears from the following:--

 "May 20, 1692. --THE TESTIMONY OF GEORGE HERRICK, aged thirty-four or thereabouts, and JOHN PUTNAM, JR. , of Salem Village, aged thirty-five years or thereabouts. --Testifieth and saith, that, being at the house of the above-said John Putnam, both saw Mercy Lewis in a very dreadful and solemn condition, so that to our apprehension she could not continue long in this world without a mitigation of those torments we saw her in, which caused us to expedite a hasty despatch to apprehend Mary Easty, in hopes, if possible, it might save her life; and, returning the same night to said John Putnam's house about midnight, we found the said Mercy Lewis in a dreadful fit, but her reason was then returned. Again she said, 'What! have you brought me the winding-sheet, Goodwife Easty? Well, I had rather go into the winding-sheet than set my hand to the book;' but, after that, her fits were weaker and weaker, but still complaining that she was very sick of her stomach. About break of day, she fell asleep, but still continues extremely sick, and was taken with a dreadful fit just as we left her; so that we perceived life in her, and that was all. "

Edward Putnam, after stating that the grievous afflictions andtortures of Mercy Lewis were charged, by her and the other four girls, upon Mary Easty, deposes as follows:--

 "I myself, being there present with several others, looked for nothing else but present death for almost the space of two days and a night. She was choked almost to death, insomuch we thought sometimes she had been dead; her mouth and teeth shut; and all this very often until such time as we understood Mary Easty was laid in irons. "

Mercy's fits did not cease immediately upon Easty's being apprehended, but on her being committed to prison and chains by the magistrate inSalem. 

An examination of distances, with the map before us, will show therapidity with which business was despatched on this occasion. Abbeywent to John Putnam, Jr. 's house at nine o'clock in the morning of May20. He was sent to Thomas Putnam's house for Ann, and brought her andAbigail Williams back with him. Mary Walcot was sent for to the houseof her father, Captain Jonathan Walcot, and went up at one o'clock, "about an hour by sun. " Then Elizabeth Hubbard, who lived at the houseof Dr. Griggs, "was carried up to Constable John Putnam's house:"Jonathan Putnam, James Darling, Benjamin Hutchinson, and SamuelBraybrook got there in the evening, as they say, "between eight andeleven o'clock. " In the mean time, Marshal Herrick had arrived. Stepswere taken to get out a warrant. John Putnam and Benjamin Hutchinsonwent to Salem to Hathorne for the purpose. They must have started soonafter eight. Hathorne issued the warrant forthwith. It is dated May20. Herrick went with it to the house of Isaac Easty, made the arrest, sent his prisoner to the jail in Salem, and returned himself to JohnPutnam's house "about midnight;" staid to witness the apparentlymortal sufferings of Mercy until "about break of day;" returned toSalem; had the examination before Hathorne, at Thomas Beadle's: thewhole thing was finished, Mary Easty in irons, information of theresult carried to John Putnam's, and Mercy's agonies ceased thatafternoon, as Edward Putnam testifies. 

I have given this particular account of the circumstances that led toand attended Mary Easty's second arrest, because the papers belongingto the case afford, in some respects, a better insight of the state ofthings than others, and because they enable us to realize the powerwhich the accusing girls exercised. The continuance of theirconvulsions and spasms for such a length of time, the large number ofpersons who witnessed and watched them in the broad daylight, and theperfect success of their operations, show how thoroughly they hadbecome trained in their arts. I have presented the occurrences in theorder of time, so that, by estimating the distances traversed and theperiod within which they took place, an idea can be formed of thevehement earnestness with which men acted in the "hurryingdistractions of amazing afflictions" and overwhelming terrors. Thisinstance also gives us a view of the horrible state of things, whenany one, however respectable and worthy, was liable, at any moment, tobe seized, maligned, and destroyed. 

Mary Easty had previously experienced the malice of the persecutors. For two months she had suffered the miseries of imprisonment, had justbeen released, and for two days enjoyed the restoration of liberty, the comforts of her home, and a re-union with her family. She andthey, no doubt, considered themselves safe from any further outrage. After midnight, she was roused from sleep by the unfeeling marshal, torn from her husband and children, carried back to prison, loadedwith chains, and finally consigned to a dreadful and most cruel death. She was an excellent and pious matron. Her husband, referring to thetransaction nearly twenty years afterwards, justly expressed what allmust feel, that it was "a hellish molestation. "

One of the most malignant witnesses against Mary Easty was "GoodwifeBibber. " She obtruded herself in many of the cases, acting as a sortof outside member of the "accusing circle, " volunteering her aid incarrying on the persecutions. It was an outrage for the magistrates orjudges to have countenanced such a false defamer. There are, among thepapers, documents which show that she ought to have been punished as acalumniator, rather than be called to utter, under oath, lies againstrespectable people. The following deposition was sworn to in Court:--

 "THE TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH FOWLER, who testifieth that Goodman Bibber and his wife lived at my house; and I did observe and take notice that Goodwife Bibber was a woman who was very idle in her calling, and very much given to tattling and tale-bearing, making mischief amongst her neighbors, and very much given to speak bad words, and would call her husband bad names, and was a woman of a very turbulent, unruly spirit. "

Joseph Fowler lived in Wenham, and was a person of respectability andinfluence. His brother Philip was also a leading man; was employed asattorney by the Village Parish in its lawsuit with Mr. Parris; andmarried a sister of Joseph Herrick. They were the grandsons of thefirst Philip, who was an early emigrant from Wales, settling inIpswich, where he had large landed estates. Henry Fowler and his twobrothers, now of Danvers, are the descendants of this family: one ofthem, Augustus, distinguished as a naturalist, especially in thedepartment of ornithology; the other, Samuel Page Fowler, as anexplorer of our early annals and local antiquities. In 1692, one ofthe Fowlers conducted the proceedings in Court against the head andfront of the witchcraft prosecution; and the other had the courage, inthe most fearful hour of the delusion, to give open testimony in thedefence of its victims. It is an interesting circumstance, that one ofthe same name and descent, in his reprint of the papers of Calef andin other publications, has done as much as any other person of our dayto bring that whole transaction under the light of truth and justice. 

John Porter, who was a grandson of the original John Porter and theoriginal William Dodge and a man of property and family, with his wifeLydia; Thomas Jacobs and Mary his wife; and Richard Walker, --all ofWenham, and for a long time neighbors of this Bibber, --testify, incorroboration of the statement of Fowler, that she was a woman of anunruly, turbulent spirit, double-tongued, much given to tattling andtale-bearing, making mischief amongst her neighbors, very much givento speak bad words, often speaking against one and another, tellinglies and uttering malicious wishes against people. It was abundantlyproved that she had long been known to be able to fall into fits atany time. One witness said "she would often fall into strange fitswhen she was crossed of her humor;" and another, "that she could fallinto fits as often as she pleased. "

On the 21st of May, warrants were issued against the wife of WilliamBasset, of Lynn; Susanna Roots, of Beverly; and Sarah, daughter ofJohn Procter of Salem Farms; a few days after, against Benjamin, a sonof said John Procter; Mary Derich, wife of Michael Derich, anddaughter of William Basset of Lynn; and the wife of Robert Pease ofSalem. Such papers as relate to these persons vary in no particularworthy of notice from those already presented. 

On the 28th of May, warrants were issued against Martha Carrier, ofAndover; Elizabeth Fosdick, of Malden; Wilmot Read, of Marblehead;Sarah Rice, of Reading; Elizabeth How, of Topsfield; Captain JohnAlden, of Boston; William Procter, of Salem Farms; Captain John Flood, of Rumney Marsh; ---- Toothaker and her daughter, of Billerica; and---- Abbot, between Topsfield and Wenham line. On the 30th, a warrantwas issued against Elizabeth, wife of Stephen Paine, of Charlestown;on the 4th of June, against Mary, wife of Benjamin Ireson, of Lynn. Besides these, there are notices of complaints made and warrantsissued against a great number of people in all parts of the country:Mary Bradbury, of Salisbury; Lydia and Sarah Dustin, of Reading; AnnSears, of Woburn; Job Tookey, of Beverly; Abigail Somes, ofGloucester; Elizabeth Carey, of Charlestown; Candy, a negro woman; andmany others. Some of them have points of interest, demandingparticular notice. 

The case of Martha Carrier has some remarkable features. It has beenshown, by passages already adduced, that every idle rumor; every thingthat the gossip of the credulous or the fertile imaginations of themalignant could produce; every thing, gleaned from the memory or thefancy, that could have an unfavorable bearing upon an accused person, however foreign or irrelevant it might be to the charge, was allowedto be brought in evidence before the magistrates, and received at thetrials. We have seen that a child under five years of age wasarrested, and put into prison. Children were not only permitted, butinduced, to become witnesses against their parents, and parentsagainst their children. Husbands and wives were made to criminate eachother as witnesses in court. When Martha Carrier was arrested, four ofher children were also taken into custody. An indictment against oneof them is among the papers. Under the terrors brought to bear uponthem, they were prevailed on to be confessors. The following shows howthese children were trained to tell their story:--

 "It was asked Sarah Carrier by the magistrates, --

 "How long hast thou been a witch?--Ever since I was six years old. 

 "How old are you now?--Near eight years old: brother Richard says I shall be eight years old in November next. 

 "Who made you a witch?--My mother: she made me set my hand to a book. 

 "How did you set your hand to it?--I touched it with my fingers, and the book was red: the paper of it was white. 

 "She said she never had seen the black man: the place where she did it was in Andrew Foster's pasture, and Elizabeth Johnson, Jr. , was there. Being asked who was there besides, she answered, her aunt Toothaker and her cousin. Being asked when it was, she said, when she was baptized. 

 "What did they promise to give you?--A black dog. 

 "Did the dog ever come to you?--No. 

 "But you said you saw a cat once: what did that say to you?--It said it would tear me in pieces, if I would not set my hand to the book. 

 "She said her mother baptized her, and the Devil, or black man, was not there, as she saw; and her mother said, when she baptized her, 'Thou art mine for ever and ever. Amen. '

 "How did you afflict folks?--I pinched them. 

 "And she said she had no puppets, but she went to them that she afflicted. Being asked whether she went in her body or her spirit, she said in her spirit. She said her mother carried her thither to afflict. 

 "How did your mother carry you when she was in prison?--She came like a black cat. 

 "How did you know it was your mother?--The cat told me so, that she was my mother. She said she afflicted Phelps's child last Saturday, and Elizabeth Johnson joined with her to do it. She had a wooden spear, about as long as her finger, of Elizabeth Johnson; and she had it of the Devil. She would not own that she had ever been at the witch-meeting at the village. This is the substance. 

 "SIMON WILLARD. "

The confession of another of her children is among the papers. It runsthus:--

 "Have you been in the Devil's snare?--Yes. 

 "Is your brother Andrew ensnared by the Devil's snare?--Yes. 

 "How long has your brother been a witch?--Near a month. 

 "How long have you been a witch?--Not long. 

 "Have you joined in afflicting the afflicted persons?--Yes. 

 "You helped to hurt Timothy Swan, did you?--Yes. 

 "How long have you been a witch?--About five weeks. 

 "Who was in company when you covenanted with the Devil?--Mrs. Bradbury. 

 "Did she help you afflict?--Yes. 

 "Who was at the village meeting when you were there?--Goodwife How, Goodwife Nurse, Goodwife Wildes, Procter and his wife, Mrs. Bradbury, and Corey's wife. 

 "What did they do there?--Eat, and drank wine. 

 "Was there a minister there?--No, not as I know of. 

 "From whence had you your wine?--From Salem, I think, it was. 

 "Goodwife Oliver there?--Yes: I knew her. "

In concluding his report of the trial of this wretched woman, whosechildren were thus made to become the instruments for procuring herdeath, Dr. Cotton Mather expresses himself in the followinglanguage:--

 "This rampant hag (Martha Carrier) was the person of whom the confessions of the witches, and of her own children among the rest, agreed that the Devil had promised her that she should be queen of Hell. "

It is quite evident that this "rampant hag" had no better opinion ofthe dignitaries and divines who managed matters at the time than theyhad of her. The record of her examination shows that she was notafraid to speak her mind, and in plain terms too. When brought beforethe magistrates, the following were their questions and her answers. The accusing witnesses having severally made their charges againsther, declaring that she had tormented them in various ways, andthreatened to cut their throats if they would not sign the Devil'sbook, which, they said, she had presented to them, the magistratesaddressed her in these words: "What do you say to this you are chargedwith?" She answered, "I have not done it. " One of the accusers criedout that she was, at that moment, sticking pins into her. Anotherdeclared that she was then looking upon "the black man, "--the shape inwhich they pretended the Devil appeared. The magistrate asked theaccused, "What black man is that?" Her answer was, "I know none. " Theaccusers cried out that the black man was present, and visible tothem. The magistrate asked her, "What black man did you see?" Heranswer was, "I saw no black man but your own presence. " Whenever shelooked upon the accusers, they were knocked down. The magistrate, entirely deluded by their practised acting, said to her, "Can you lookupon these, and not knock them down?" Her answer was, "They willdissemble, if I look upon them. " He continued: "You see, you look uponthem, and they fall down. " She broke out, "It is false: the Devil is aliar. I looked upon none since I came into the room but you. " SusannaSheldon cried out, in a trance, "I wonder what could you murderthirteen persons for. " At this, her spirit became aroused: theaccusers fell into the most intolerable outcries and agonies. Theaccused rebuked the magistrate, charging him with unfairness in notpaying any regard to what she said, and receiving every thing that theaccusers said. "It is a shameful thing, that you should mind thesefolks that are out of their wits;" and, turning to those who werebringing these false and ridiculous charges against her, she said, "You lie: I am wronged. " The energy and courage of the prisoner threwthe accusers, magistrates, and the whole crowd into confusion anduproar. The record closes the description of the scene in these words:"The tortures of the afflicted were so great that there was noenduring of it, so that she was ordered away, and to be bound hand andfoot with all expedition; the afflicted, in the mean while, almostkilled, to the great trouble of all spectators, magistrates, andothers. "

Parris closes his report of this examination as follows:--

 "NOTE. --As soon as she was well bound, they all had strange and sudden ease. Mary Walcot told the magistrates that this woman told her she had been a witch this forty years. "

This shows the sort of communications the girls were allowed to holdwith the magistrates, exciting their prejudices against accusedpersons, and filling their ears with all sorts of exaggerated andfalse stories. However much she may have been maligned by herneighbors, some of whom had long been in the habit of circulatingslanders against her, the whole tenor of the papers relating to hershows that she always indignantly repelled the charge of being awitch, and was the last person in the world to have volunteered such astatement as Mary Walcot reported. 

The examination of Martha Carrier must have been one of the moststriking scenes of the whole drama of the witchcraft proceedings. Thevillage meeting-house presented a truly wild and exciting spectacle. The fearful and horrible superstition which darkened the minds of thepeople was displayed in their aspect and movements. Their belief, that, then and there, they were witnessing the great struggle betweenthe kingdoms of God and of the Evil One, and that every thing was atstake on the issue, gave an awe-struck intensity to their expression. The blind, unquestioning confidence of the magistrates, clergy, andall concerned in the prosecutions, in the evidence of the accusers;the loud outcries of their pretended sufferings; their contortions, swoonings, and tumblings, excited the usual consternation in theassembly. In addition to this, there was the more than ordinary boldand defiant bearing of the prisoner, stung to desperation by theoutrage upon human nature in the abuse practised upon her poorchildren; her firm and unshrinking courage, facing the tempest thatwas raised to overwhelm her, sternly rebuking the magistrates, --"It isa shameful thing that you should mind these folks that are out oftheir wits;"--her whole demeanor, proclaiming her conscious innocence, and proving that she chose chains, the dungeon, and the scaffold, rather than to belie herself. Seldom has a scene in real life, or apicture wrought by the inspiration of genius and the hand of art, inits individual characters or its general grouping, surpassed thatpresented on this occasion. 

Hutchinson has preserved the record of another examination of adifferent character. An ignorant negro slave-woman was brought beforethe magistrates. She was cunning enough, not only to confess, but tocover herself with the cloak of having been led into the difficulty byher mistress. 

 "Candy, are you a witch?--Candy no witch in her country. Candy's mother no witch. Candy no witch, Barbados. This country, mistress give Candy witch. 

 "Did your mistress make you a witch in this country?--Yes: in this country, mistress give Candy witch. 

 "What did your mistress do to make you witch?--Mistress bring book and pen and ink; make Candy write in it. "

Upon being asked what she wrote, she took a pen and ink, and made amark. Upon being asked how she afflicted people, and where were thepuppets she did it with, she said, that, if they would let her go outfor a moment, she would show them how. They allowed her to go out, andshe presently returned with two pieces of cloth or linen, --one withtwo knots, the other with one tied in it. Immediately on seeing thesearticles, the "afflicted children" were "greatly affrighted, " andfell into violent fits. When they came to, they declared that the"black man, " Mrs. Hawkes, and the negro, stood by the puppets of rags, and pinched them. Whereupon they fell into fits again. "A bit of oneof the rags being set on fire, " they all shrieked that they wereburned, and "cried out dreadfully. " Some pieces being dipped in water, they went into the convulsions and struggles of drowning persons; andone of them rushed out of the room, and raced down towards the river. 

Candy and the girls having played their parts so well, there was noescape for poor Mrs. Hawkes but in confession, which she forthwithmade. They were both committed to prison. Fortunately, it was notconvenient to bring them to trial until the next January, when, thedelusion having blown over, they were acquitted. 

Besides those already mentioned, there were others, among the victimsof this delusion, whose cases excite our tenderest sensibility, anddeepen our horror in the contemplation of the scene. It seems, that, some time before the transactions took place in Salem Village, adifficulty arose between two families on the borders of Topsfield andIpswich, such as often occur among neighbors, about some small matterof property, fences, or boundaries. Their names were Perley and How. Adaughter of Perley, about ten years of age, hearing, probably, strongexpressions by her parents, became excited against the Hows, andcharged the wife of How with bewitching her. She acted much after themanner of the "afflicted girls" in Salem Village, which was near theplace of her residence. Very soon the idea became current that Mrs. How was a witch; and every thing that happened amiss to any one waslaid at her door. She was cried out against by the "afflictedchildren" in Salem Village, and carried before the magistrates forexamination on the 31st of May, 1692. Upon being brought into herpresence, the accusers fell into their usual fits and convulsions, andcharged her with tormenting them. To the question, put by themagistrates, "What say you to this charge?" her answer was, "If it wasthe last moment I was to live, God knows I am innocent of any thing inthis nature. " The papers connected with her trial bear abundanttestimony to the excellent character of this pious and amiable woman. A person, who had lived near her twenty-four years, states, in herdeposition, "that she had found her a neighborly woman, conscientiousin her dealing, faithful to her promises, and Christianlike in herconversation. " Several others join in a deposition to this effect:"For our own parts, we have been well acquainted with her for abovetwenty years. We never saw but that she carried it very well, and thatboth her words and actions were always such as well became a goodChristian. "

The following passages illustrate the wicked arts sometimes used tobring accusations upon innocent persons, and give affecting proof ofthe excellence of the character and heart of Elizabeth How:--

 "THE TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL PHILLIPS, aged about sixty-seven, minister of the word of God in Rowley, who saith that Mr. Payson (minister of God's word also in Rowley) and myself went, being desired, to Samuel Perly, of Ipswich, to see their young daughter, who was visited with strange fits; and, in her fits (as her father and mother affirmed), did mention Goodwife How, the wife of James How, Jr. , of Ipswich, as if she was in the house, and did afflict her. When we were in the house, the child had one of her fits, but made no mention of Goodwife How; and, when the fit was over, and she came to herself, Goodwife How went to the child, and took her by the hand, and asked her whether she had ever done her any hurt; and she answered, 'No, never; and, if I did complain of you in my fits, I knew not that I did so. ' I further can affirm, upon oath, that young Samuel Perley, brother to the afflicted girl, looked out of a chamber window (I and the afflicted child being without doors together), and said to his sister, 'Say Goodwife How is a witch, --say she is a witch;' and the child spake not a word that way. But I looked up to the window where the youth stood, and rebuked him for his boldness to stir up his sister to accuse the said Goodwife How; whereas she had cleared her from doing any hurt to his sister in both our hearing; and I added, 'No wonder that the child, in her fits, did mention Goodwife How, when her nearest relations were so frequent in expressing their suspicions, in the child's hearing, when she was out of her fits, that the said Goodwife How was an instrument of mischief to the child. '"

Mr. Payson, in reference to the same occasion, deposed as follows:--

 "Being in Perley's house some considerable time before the said Goodwife How came in, their afflicted daughter, upon something that her mother spake to her with tartness, presently fell into one of her usual strange fits, during which she made no mention (as I observed) of the abovesaid How her name, or any thing relating to her. Some time after, the said How came in, when said girl had recovered her capacity, her fit being over. Said How took said girl by the hand, and asked her whether she had ever done her any hurt. The child answered, 'No; never, ' with several expressions to that purpose. "

The bearing of Elizabeth How, under accusations so cruelly andshamefully fabricated and circulated against her, exhibits one of themost beautiful pictures of a truly forgiving spirit and of Christlikelove anywhere to be found. Several witnesses say, "We often spoke toher of some things that were reported of her, that gave some suspicionof that she is now charged with; and she, always professing herinnocency, often desired our prayers to God for her, that God wouldkeep her in his fear, and support her under her burden. We have oftenheard her speaking of those persons that raised those reports of her, and we never heard her speak badly of them for the same; but, in ourhearing, hath often said that she desired God that he would sanctifythat affliction, as well as others, for her spiritual good. " Otherstestified to the same effect. Simon Chapman, and Mary, his wife, saythat "they had been acquainted with the wife of James How, Jr. , as aneighbor, for this nine or ten years;" that they had resided in thesame house with her "by the fortnight together;" that they never knewany thing but what was good in her. They "found, at all times, by herdiscourse, she was a woman of affliction, and mourning for sin inherself and others; and, when she met with any affliction, she seemedto justify God and say that it was all better than she deserved, though it was by false accusations from men. She used to bless Godthat she got good by affliction; for it made her examine her ownheart. We never heard her revile any person that hath accused her withwitchcraft, but pitied them, and said, 'I pray God forgive them; forthey harm themselves more than me. Though I am a great sinner, I amclear of that; and such kind of affliction doth but set me toexamining my own heart, and I find God wonderfully supporting me andcomforting me by his word and promises. '"

Joseph Knowlton and his wife Mary, who had lived near her, andsometimes in the same family with her, testified, that, having heardthe stories told about her, they were led to--

 "take special notice of her life and conversation ever since. And I have asked her if she could freely forgive them that raised such reports of her. She told me yes, with all her heart, desiring that God would give her a heart to be more humble under such a providence; and, further, she said she was willing to do any good she could to those who had done unneighborly by her. Also this I have taken notice, that she would deny herself to do a neighbor a good turn. "

The father of her husband, --James How, Sr. , aged about ninety-fouryears, --in a communication addressed to the Court, declared that--

 "he, living by her for about thirty years, hath taken notice that she hath carried it well becoming her place, as a daughter, as a wife, in all relations, setting aside human infirmities, as becometh a Christian; with respect to myself as a father, very dutifully; and as a wife to my son, very careful, loving, obedient, and kind, --considering his want of eyesight, tenderly leading him about by the hand. Desiring God may guide your honors, ... I rest yours to serve. "

The only evidence against this good woman--beyond the outcries andfits of the "afflicted children, " enacted in their usual skilful andartful style--consisted of the most wretched gossip ever circulated inan ignorant and benighted community. It came from people in the backsettlements of Ipswich and Topsfield, and disclosed a depth of absurdand brutal superstition, which it is difficult to believe ever existedin New England. So far as those living in secluded and remotelocalities are regarded, this was the most benighted period of ourhistory. Except where, as in Salem Village, special circumstances hadkept up the general intelligence, there was much darkness on thepopular mind. The education that came over with the first emigrantsfrom the mother-country had gone with them to their graves. The systemof common schools had not begun to produce its fruit in the thinlypeopled outer settlements. There is no more disgraceful page in ourannals than that which details the testimony given at the trial, andrecords the conviction and execution, of Elizabeth How. 

But the dark shadows of that day of folly, cruelty, and crime, servedto bring into a brighter and purer light virtues exhibited by manypersons. We meet affecting instances, all along, of family fidelityand true Christian benevolence. James How, as has been stated, wasstricken with blindness. He had two daughters, Mary and Abigail. Although their farm was out of the line of the public-roads, travelvery difficult, and they must have encountered many hardships, annoyances, and, it is to be feared, sometimes unfeeling treatment bythe way, one of them accompanied their father, twice every week, tovisit their mother in her prison-walls. They came on horseback; shemanaging the bridle, and guiding him by the hand after alighting. Their humble means were exhausted in these offices of reverence andaffection. One of the noble girls made her way to Boston, sought outthe Governor, and implored a reprieve for her mother; but in vain. Thesight of these young women, leading their blind father to comfort andprovide for their "honored mother, --as innocent, " as they declared herto be, "of the crime charged, as any person in the world, "--sofaithful and constant in their filial love and duty, relieved thehorrors of the scene; and it ought to be held in perpetualremembrance. The shame of that day is not, and will not be, forgotten;neither should its beauty and glory. 

The name of Elizabeth How, before marriage, was Jackson. Among theaccounts rendered against the country for expenses incurred in thewitchcraft prosecutions are these two items: "For John Jackson, Sr. , one pair of fetters, five shillings; for John Jackson, Jr. , one pairof fetters, five shillings. " There is also an item for carrying "thetwo Jacksons" from one jail to another, and back again. No otherreference to them is found among the papers. They were, perhaps, abrother and nephew of Elizabeth How. There is reason to suppose thather husband, James How, Jr. , was a nephew of the Rev. Francis Dane, ofAndover. 

The examination of Job Tookey, of Beverly, presents some points worthyof notice. He is described as a "laborer, " but was evidently a person, although perhaps inconsiderate of speech, of more than commondiscrimination, and not wholly deluded by the fanaticism of the times. He is charged with having said that he "would take Mr. Burroughs'spart;" "that he was not the Devil's servant, but the Devil was his. "When the girls testified that they saw his shape afflicting persons, he answered, like a sensible man, if they really saw any such thing, "it was not he, but the Devil in his shape, that hurts the people. "Susanna Sheldon, Mary Warren, and Ann Putnam, all declared, that, atthat very moment while the examination was going on, two men and twowomen and one child "rose from the dead, and cried, 'Vengeance!vengeance!'" Nobody else saw or heard any thing: but the girlssuddenly became dumb; their eyes were fixed on vacancy, all lookingtowards the same spot; and their whole appearance gave assurance ofthe truth of what they said. In a short time, Mary Warren recoveredthe use of her vocal organs, and exclaimed, "There are three men, andthree women, and two children. They are all in their winding-sheets:they look pale upon us, but red upon Tookey, --red as blood. " Again, she exclaimed, in a startled and affrighted manner, "There is a youngchild under the table, crying out for vengeance. " Elizabeth Booth, pointing to the same place, was struck speechless. In this way, themurder of about every one who had died at Royal Side, for a year ortwo past, was put upon Tookey. Some of them were called by name; theothers, the girls pretended not to recognize. The wrath and horror ofthe whole community were excited against him, and he was committed tojail, by the order of the magistrates, --Bartholomew Gedney, JonathanCorwin, and John Hathorne. 

No character, indeed, however blameless lovely or venerable, was safe. The malignant accusers struck at the highest marks, and the consumingfire of popular frenzy was kindled and attracted towards the mostcommanding objects. Mary Bradbury is described, in the indictmentagainst her, as the "wife of Captain Thomas Bradbury, of Salisbury, inthe county of Essex, gentleman. " A few of the documents that arepreserved, belonging to her case, will give some idea what sort of aperson she was:--

 "_The Answer of Mary Bradbury to the Charge of Witchcraft, or Familiarity with the Devil. _

 "I do plead 'Not guilty. ' I am wholly innocent of any such wickedness, through the goodness of God that have kept me hitherto. I am the servant of Jesus Christ, and have given myself up to him as my only Lord and Saviour, and to the diligent attendance upon him in all his holy ordinances, in utter contempt and defiance of the Devil and all his works, as horrid and detestable, and, accordingly, have endeavored to frame my life and conversation according to the rules of his holy word; and, in that faith and practice, resolve, by the help and assistance of God, to continue to my life's end. 

 "For the truth of what I say, as to matter of practice, I humbly refer myself to my brethren and neighbors that know me, and unto the Searcher of all hearts, for the truth and uprightness of my heart therein (human frailties and unavoidable infirmities excepted, of which I bitterly complain every day). 

 MARY BRADBURY. "

 "July 28, 1692. --Concerning my beloved wife, Mary Bradbury, this is what I have to say: We have been married fifty-five years, and she hath been a loving and faithful wife to me. Unto this day, she hath been wonderful laborious, diligent, and industrious, in her place and employment, about the bringing-up of our family (which have been eleven children of our own, and four grandchildren). She was both prudent and provident, of a cheerful spirit, liberal and charitable. She being now very aged and weak, and grieved under her affliction, may not be able to speak much for herself, not being so free of speech as some others may be. I hope her life and conversation have been such amongst her neighbors as gives a better and more real testimony of her than can be expressed by words. 

 "Owned by me, THO. BRADBURY. "

The Rev. James Allin made oath before Robert Pike, an assistant andmagistrate, as follows:--

 "I, having lived nine years at Salisbury in the work of the ministry, and now four years in the office of a pastor, to my best notice and observation of Mrs. Bradbury, she hath lived according to the rules of the gospel amongst us; was a constant attender upon the ministry of the word, and all the ordinances of the gospel; full of works of charity and mercy to the sick and poor: neither have I seen or heard any thing of her unbecoming the profession of the gospel. "

Robert Pike also affirmed to the truth of Mr. Allin's statement, from"upwards of fifty years' experience, " as did John Pike also: they bothdeclared themselves ready and desirous to give their testimony beforethe Court. 

One hundred and seventeen of her neighbors--the larger part of themheads of families, and embracing the most respectable people of thatvicinity--signed their names to a paper, of which the following is acopy:--

 "Concerning Mrs. Bradbury's life and conversation, we, the subscribers, do testify, that it was such as became the gospel: she was a lover of the ministry, in all appearance, and a diligent attender upon God's holy ordinances, being of a courteous and peaceable disposition and carriage. Neither did any of us (some of whom have lived in the town with her above fifty years) ever hear or ever know that she ever had any difference or falling-out with any of her neighbors, --man, woman, or child, --but was always ready and willing to do for them what lay in her power night and day, though with hazard of her health, or other danger. More might be spoken in her commendation, but this for the present. "

Although this aged matron and excellent Christian lady was convictedand sentenced to death, it is most satisfactory to find that sheescaped from prison, and her life was saved. 

The following facts show the weight which ought to have been attachedto these statements. The position, as well as character and age, ofMary [Perkins] Bradbury entitled her to the highest consideration, inthe structure of society at that time. This is recognized in the title"Mrs. , " uniformly given her. She had been noted, through life, forbusiness capacity, energy, and influence; and, in 1692, was probablyseventy-five years of age, and somewhat infirm in health. Her husband, Thomas Bradbury, had been a prominent character in the colony for morethan fifty years. In 1641, he was appointed, by the General Court, Clerk of the Writs for Salisbury, with the functions of a magistrate, to execute all sorts of legal processes in that place. He was a deputyin 1651 and many subsequent years; a commissioner for Salisbury in1657, empowered to act in all criminal cases, and bind over offenders, where it was proper, to higher courts, to take testimonies upon oath, and to join persons in marriage. He was required to keep a record ofall his doings. If the parties agreed to that effect, he wasauthorized to hear and determine cases of every kind and degree, without the intervention of a jury. The towns north of the Merrimac, and all beyond now within the limits of New Hampshire, constituted theCounty of Norfolk; and Thomas Bradbury, for a long series of years, was one of its commissioners and associate judges. From the first, hewas conspicuous in military matters; having been commissioned by theGeneral Court, in 1648, Ensign of the trainband in Salisbury. He roseto its command; and, in the latter portion of his life, wasuniversally spoken of as "Captain Bradbury. " All along, the records ofthe General Court, for half a century, demonstrate the estimation inwhich he was held; various important trusts and special servicesrequiring integrity and ability being from time to time committed tohim. His family was influentially connected. His son William marriedthe widow of Samuel Maverick, Jr. , who was the son of one of theKing's Commissioners in 1664: she was the daughter of the Rev. JohnWheelwright, a man of great note, intimately related to the celebratedAnne Hutchinson, and united with her by sympathy in sentiment andparticipation in exile. 

Robert Pike, born in 1616, was a magistrate in 1644. He was deputyfrom Salisbury in 1648, and many times after; Associate Justice forNorfolk in 1650; and Assistant in 1682, holding that high station, byannual elections, to the close of the first charter, and during thewhole period of the intervening and insurgent government. He wasnamed as one of the council that succeeded to the House of Assistants, when, under the new charter, Massachusetts became a royal province. Hewas always at the head of military affairs, having been commissioned, by the General Court, Lieutenant of the Salisbury trainband in 1648;and, in the later years of his life, he held the rank and title ofmajor. John Pike, probably his son, resided in Hampton in 1691, andwas minister of Dover at his death in 1710. 

Surely, the attestations of such men as the Pikes, father and son, andthe Rev. James Allin, to the Christian excellence of Mary Bradbury, must be allowed to corroborate fully the declarations of herneighbors, her husband, and herself. 

The motives and influences that led to her arrest and condemnation in1692 demand an explanation. The question arises, Why should theattention of the accusing girls have been led to this aged and mostrespectable woman, living at such a distance, beyond the Merrimac? Acritical scrutiny of the papers in the case affords a clew leading tothe true answer. 

The wife of Sergeant Thomas Putnam, as has been stated (vol. I. P. 253), was Ann Carr of Salisbury. Her father, George Carr, was an earlysettler in that place, and appears to have been an enterprising andprosperous person. The ferry for the main travel of the country acrossthe Merrimac was from points of land owned by him, and always underhis charge. He was engaged in ship-building, --employing, and havingin his family, young men; among them a son of Zerubabel Endicott, bearing the same name. 

Among the papers in the case is the following:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF RICHARD CARR, who testifieth and saith, that, about thirteen years ago, presently after some difference that happened to be between my honored father, Mr. George Carr, and Mrs. Bradbury, the prisoner at the bar, upon a sabbath at noon, as we were riding home, by the house of Captain Tho: Bradbury, I saw Mrs. Bradbury go into her gate, turn the corner of, and immediately there darted out of her gate a blue boar, and darted at my father's horse's legs, which made him stumble; but I saw it no more. And my father said, 'Boys, what do you see?' We both answered, 'A blue boar. '

 "ZERUBABEL ENDICOTT testifieth and saith, that I lived at Mr. George Carr, now deceased, at the time above mentioned, and was present with Mr. George Carr and Mr. Richard Carr. And I also saw a blue boar dart out of Mr. Bradbury's gate to Mr. George Carr's horse's legs, which made him stumble after a strange manner. And I also saw the blue boar dart from Mr. Carr's horse's legs in at Mrs. Bradbury's window. And Mr. Carr immediately said, 'Boys, what did you see?' And we both said, 'A blue boar. ' Then said he, 'From whence came it?' And we said, 'Out of Mr. Bradbury's gate. ' Then said he, 'I am glad you see it as well as I. ' _Jurat in Curia_, Sept. 9, '92. "

Stephen Sewall, the clerk of the courts, with his usual eagerness tomake the most of the testimony against persons accused, adds to thedeposition the following:--

 "And they both further say, on their oaths, that Mr. Carr discoursed with them, as they went home, about what had happened, and they all concluded that it was Mrs. Bradbury that so appeared as a blue boar. "

At the date of this occurrence, Richard Carr was twenty years of age, and Zerubabel Endicott a lad of of fifteen. 

It is not to be wondered at that there was "some difference between"George Carr and Mrs. Bradbury, if he was in the habit of indulging insuch talk about her as he took the leading part in on this occasion. He evidently encouraged in his "boys" the absurd imaginations withwhich their credulity had been stimulated. They were prepared bypreconceived notions to witness something preternatural about thepremises of Mrs. Bradbury; and, in their jaundiced vision, any animal, moving in and out of the gate, might naturally assume the likeness ofa "blue boar. " Such ideas circulating in the family, and among theapprentices of Carr, would soon be widely spread. No doubt, Zerubabel, on his visits to his home, told wondrous stories about Mrs. Bradbury. His brother Samuel, then a youth of eighteen, had his imaginationfilled with them; and some time after, on a voyage to "Barbadoes andSaltitudos, " in which severe storms and various disasters wereexperienced, attributed them all to Mrs. Bradbury; and, "in a brightmoonshining night, sitting upon the windlass, to which he had beensent forward to look out for land, " the wild fancies of his excitedimagination took effect. He heard "a rumbling noise, " and thought hesaw the legs of some person. "Presently he was shook, and looked overhis shoulder, and saw the appearance of a woman, from her middleupwards, having a white cap and white neckcloth on her, which thenaffrighted him very much; and, as he was turning of the windlass, hesaw the aforesaid two legs. " Such superstitious phantasms seem to benatural to the experiences of sailor-life, and perhaps still linger inthe forecastle and at the night-watch. 

The habit of maligning Mrs. Bradbury as a witch dated back in the Carrfamily more than thirteen years, as the following deposition proves. Igive it precisely as it is in the original. As in a few otherinstances in this work, the spelling and punctuation are preserved ascuriosities. Like all the papers in the case, with one exception, presented in court against Mrs. Bradbury, it is in the handwriting ofSergeant Thomas Putnam:--

[Transcriber's Note: Spelling and punctuation in the passage below isas in original. ]

 "THE DEPOSISTION OF JAMES CARR. Who testifieth and saith that about 20 years agoe one day as I was accidently att the house of mr wheleright and his daughter the widdow maverick then liued there: and she then did most curtuously invite me to com oftener to the house and wondered I was grown such a stranger. And with in a few days affter one evening I went thether againe: and when I came thether againe: william Bradbery was yr who was then a suter to the said widdow but I did not know it tell affterwards: affter I came in the widdow did so corsely treat the sd william Bradbery that he went away semeing to be angury: presently affter this I was taken affter a strange maner as if liueing creaturs did run about euery part of my body redy to tare me to peaces and so I continewed for about 3 qurters of a year by times & I applyed myself to doctor Crosbe who gave me a grate deal of visek but could make non work tho he steept tobacco in bosit drink he could make non to work where upon he tould me that he beleved I was behaged: and I tould him I had thought so a good while: and he asked me by hom I tould him I did not care for spaking for one was counted an honest woman: but he uging I tould him and he said he did beleve that mis Bradbery was a grat deal worss then goody martin: then presently affter this one night I being a bed & brod awake there came sumthing to me which I thought was a catt and went to strick it ofe the bed and was sezed fast that I could not stir hedd nor foot. But by and coming to my strenth I herd sumthing a coming to me againe and I prepared my self to strick it: and it coming upon the bed I did strick at it and I beleve I hit it: and after that visek would work on me and I beleve in my hart that mis Bradbery the prisoner att the barr has often afflected me by acts of wicthcraft. 

 "_Jurat in Curia_ Sep'mr. 9. 92. "[A]

[Footnote A: In the innumerable depositions written by Thomas Putnam, he is not so careful to be correct, in his chirography andconstruction, as in his parish-records. But, if the reader is inclinedto make the experiment, he will find, that, if the above documentshould be properly pointed and spelled, according to our fashion atthe present day, it would read well, and is clearly and forcibly puttogether. Spelling, at that time, was phonetic, and it enables us toascertain the then prevalent pronunciation of words. "Corsely, " nodoubt, shows how the word was then spoken. "Angury" was, with a largeclass of words now dissyllables, then a trisyllable. "Tould, ""spaking, " and many other words above, are spelled just as they werethen pronounced. "Wicthcraft" is always, I believe, spelled this wayby Thomas Putnam. He had not got rid of the old Anglo-Saxon sound ofthe word "witch, " brought by his father from Buckinghamshire, sixtyyears before, --"wicca. "

The condition of medical science and practice, at that period, iscuriously illustrated in this paper. It is plain that the distemper ofJames Carr was purely in the realm of the sensibilities and fancy; and"doctor Crosbe" is not wholly to blame because his "visek" did not"work. " A good smart nightmare, with a feeling that he had given athorough basting to the spectre, in the form of a cat, of the supposedauthor of his woful and aggravated disappointment in love, was what heneeded; and it cured him. "A posset of sack" was Falstaff's refuge, from the plight into which he had been led by "building upon a foolishwoman's promise, " when he emerged from the Thames and the"buck-basket. " Many others, no doubt, in drowning sorrow andmortification, have found it "the sovereignest thing on earth. " But, as administered by physicians of the Dr. Crosby school, with tobaccosteeped in it, it must have been a "villanous compound. "]

But the whole of George Carr's family did not sympathize in thismorbid state of prejudice, or cherish such foolish and malignantfancies, against Mrs. Bradbury. One of the sons, William, had married, Aug. 20, 1672, Elizabeth, daughter of Robert Pike. It appears, by thefollowing deposition, which is in the handwriting of Major Pike, thatthere had been another love affair between the families, leading to amelancholy result, inflaming still more the morbid and malignprejudice against Mrs. Bradbury; but William repudiated it utterly:--

 "THE TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM CARR, aged forty-one, or thereabouts, is that my brother John Carr, when he was young, was a man of as good capacity as most men of his age; but falling in love with Jane True (now wife of Captain John March), and my father being persuaded by [----] of the family (which I shall not name) not to let him marry so young, my father would not give him a portion, whereupon the match broke off, which my brother laid so much to heart that he grew melancholy, and by degrees much crazed, not being the man, that he was before, to his dying day. 

 "I do further testify that my said brother was sick about a fortnight or three weeks, and then died; and I was present with him when he died. And I do affirm that he died peaceably and quietly, never manifesting the least trouble in the world about anybody, nor did not say any thing of Mrs. Bradbury nor anybody else doing him hurt; and yet I was with him till the breath and life were out of his body. "

The usual form, _jurat in curia_, is written at the foot of thisdeposition, but evidently by a much later hand; and this leads me tomention the improbability that any testimony in favor of the accusedever reached the Court at the trials. They had no counsel: theattorney-general had prejudged all the cases; and his mind and thoseof the judges repudiated utterly any thing like an investigation. Every friendly voice was silenced. The doors were closed against thedefence. Robert Pike, an assistant under the old and a councillorunder the new government, endeavored in vain to enter them. 

William Carr was a person of great respectability, and bore theappointment, by the General Court, of land-surveyor for the towns inthe northern part of the present county of Essex. 

The member of the family who--as stated in the foregoingdeposition--prevented the match, all the circumstances seem toindicate, was Mrs. Ann Putnam. She perhaps had experienced the effectsof a too early marriage, bringing the burden of life upon theconstitution and the character before they are mature enough to bearit. She may have attributed to this cause the troubles and trials withwhich her cup had been so bitterly filled, and the blasting of thehappiness of her youth. Half deranged, as perpetual excitement fromthe parish quarrels in reference to Mr. Bayley had made her, she mayhave become morbidly opposed to the equally early marriage of abrother. Added to this was the fact that Henry True had married one ofMrs. Bradbury's daughters, and that Jane True was his sister. Itcannot be doubted that she entertained the same ideas about Mrs. Bradbury as her father and brothers, James and Richard; and, for thisreason, also opposed the match of her brother John. Wishing to berelieved from the self-reproach of having caused his derangement anddeath, when the witchcraft delusion broke out at Salem Village and shebecame wholly absorbed by it, as all other deaths and misfortunes wereascribed to it, she avowed and maintained the belief, as some hadsuspected at the time, that the happiness, health, reason, and life ofher brother had been destroyed by diabolical agency, practised by Mrs. Bradbury. 

In the state of things long subsisting between the Bradbury and Carrfamilies, we find an explanation of the movement made against Mrs. Bradbury. Young Ann Putnam may have often heard her unpleasantlyspoken of by her mother, and it was natural that she should have"cried out against her. "

The family of Mrs. Ann Putnam seem to have had constitutional traitsthat illustrate and explain her own character and conduct. They wereexcitable and sensitive to an extraordinary degree. Their judgment, reason, and physical systems, were subject to the power of theirfancies and affections. One of her brothers, in consequence of beingbadly coquetted with and jilted by a young widow, was thrown into anawful condition of body and mind "for about three-quarters of a year. "The reason, health, and heart of another were broken; and he sunk intoan early grave, in consequence of having been crossed in love. Thedeath of her sister Bayley may have been caused by the unhappycontroversies in the village parish. We have seen, and shall see, theall but maniac condition to which excitement brought her own mind. Atlast, the heaviest blow that can fall upon a fond wife suddenlysnapped the brittle cord of her life. These considerations must beborne in mind, while we attempt to explain her conduct, and shouldthrow the weight of pity and charity into the scales, if mortaljudgment ventures to estimate her guilt. They are known to theInfinite Mind, and never overlooked by divine mercy. 

I have introduced these singular private details to illustrate whatthe documents all along show, --that the proceedings against personscharged with witchcraft, in 1692, were instigated by all sorts ofpersonal grudges and private piques, many of them of long standing, fomented and kept alive by an unhappy indulgence of unworthy feelings, always ready to mix themselves with popular excitements, and leadingall concerned headlong to the utmost extent of mischief and wrong. 

The case of Mary Bradbury has been allowed to occupy so large a space, because I desire to disabuse the public mind of a great error on thissubject. It has been too much supposed, that the sufferers in thewitchcraft delusion were generally of the inferior classes of society, and particularly ignorant and benighted. They were the very reverse. They mostly belonged to families in the better conditions of life, and, many of them, to the highest social level. They were all personsof great moral firmness and rectitude, as was demonstrated by theirbearing under persecutions and outrage, and when confronting theterrors of death. Their names do not deserve reproach, and theirmemories ought to be held in honor. 

The following account of the examination of Elizabeth Cary ofCharlestown, given by her husband, Captain Cary, a shipmaster, has thehighest interest, as written at the time by one who was aneye-witness, and participated in the sufferings of the occasion:--

 "May 24. --I having heard, some days, that my wife was accused of witchcraft; being much disturbed at it, by advice went to Salem Village, to see if the afflicted knew her: we arrived there on the 24th of May. It happened to be a day appointed for examination; accordingly, soon after our arrival, Mr. Hathorne and Mr. Corwin, &c. , went to the meeting-house, which was the place appointed for that work. The minister began with prayer; and, having taken care to get a convenient place, I observed that the afflicted were two girls of about ten years old, and about two or three others of about eighteen: one of the girls talked most, and could discern more than the rest. 

 "The prisoners were called in one by one, and, as they came in, were cried out at, &c. The prisoners were placed about seven or eight feet from the justices, and the accusers between the justices and them. The prisoners were ordered to stand right before the justices, with an officer appointed to hold each hand, lest they should therewith afflict them: and the prisoners' eyes must be constantly on the justices; for, if they looked on the afflicted, they would either fall into fits, or cry out of being hurt by them. After an examination of the prisoners, who it was afflicted these girls, &c. , they were put upon saying the Lord's Prayer, as a trial of their guilt. After the afflicted seemed to be out of their fits, they would look steadfastly on some one person, and frequently not speak; and then the justices said they were struck dumb, and after a little time would speak again: then the justices said to the accusers, 'Which of you will go and touch the prisoner at the bar?' Then the most courageous would adventure, but, before they had made three steps, would ordinarily fall down as in a fit: the justices ordered that they should be taken up and carried to the prisoner, that she might touch them; and as soon as they were touched by the accused, the justices would say, 'They are well, ' before I could discern any alteration, --by which I observed that the justices understood the manner of it. Thus far I was only as a spectator: my wife also was there part of the time, but no notice was taken of her by the afflicted, except once or twice they came to her, and asked her name. But I, having an opportunity to discourse Mr. Hale (with whom I had formerly acquaintance), I took his advice what I had best do, and desired of him that I might have an opportunity to speak with her that accused my wife; which he promised should be, I acquainting him that I reposed my trust in him. Accordingly, he came to me after the examination was over, and told me I had now an opportunity to speak with the said accuser, Abigail Williams, a girl eleven or twelve years old; but that we could not be in private at Mr. Parris's house, as he had promised me: we went therefore into the alehouse, where an Indian man attended us, who, it seems, was one of the afflicted; to him we gave some cider: he showed several scars, that seemed as if they had been long there, and showed them as done by witchcraft, and acquainted us that his wife, who also was a slave, was imprisoned for witchcraft. And now, instead of one accuser, they all came in, and began to tumble down like swine; and then three women were called in to attend them. We in the room were all at a stand to see who they would cry out of; but in a short time they cried out 'Cary;' and, immediately after, a warrant was sent from the justices to bring my wife before them, who were sitting in a chamber near by, waiting for this. Being brought before the justices, her chief accusers were two girls. My wife declared to the justices, that she never had any knowledge of them before that day. She was forced to stand with her arms stretched out. I requested that I might hold one of her hands, but it was denied me: then she desired me to wipe the tears from her eyes, and the sweat from her face, which I did; then she desired she might lean herself on me, saying she should faint. Justice Hathorne replied she had strength enough to torment these persons, and she should have strength enough to stand. I speaking something against their cruel proceedings, they commanded me to be silent, or else I should be turned out of the room. The Indian before mentioned was also brought in, to be one of her accusers; being come in, he now (when before the justices) fell down, and tumbled about like a hog, but said nothing. The justices asked the girls who afflicted the Indian: they answered she (meaning my wife), and that she now lay upon him. The justices ordered her to touch him, in order to his cure, but her head must be turned another way, lest, instead of curing, she should make him worse by her looking on him, her hand being guided to take hold of his; but the Indian took hold of her hand, and pulled her down on the floor in a barbarous manner: then his hand was taken off, and her hand put on his, and the cure was quickly wrought. I being extremely troubled at their inhuman dealings, uttered a hasty speech, 'That God would take vengeance on them, and desired that God would deliver us out of the hands of unmerciful men. ' Then her _mittimus_ was writ. I did with difficulty and charge obtain the liberty of a room, but no beds in it; if there had been, could have taken but little rest that night. She was committed to Boston prison; but I obtained a _habeas corpus_ to remove her to Cambridge prison, which is in our county of Middlesex. Having been there one night, next morning the jailer put irons on her legs (having received such a command); the weight of them was about eight pounds: these irons and her other afflictions soon brought her into convulsion fits, so that I thought she would have died that night. I sent to entreat that the irons might be taken off; but all entreaties were in vain, if it would have saved her life, so that in this condition she must continue. The trials at Salem coming on, I went thither to see how things were managed: and finding that the spectre evidence was there received, together with idle, if not malicious stories, against people's lives, I did easily perceive which way the rest would go; for the same evidence that served for one would serve for all the rest. I acquainted her with her danger; and that, if she were carried to Salem to be tried, I feared she would never return. I did my utmost that she might have her trial in our own county; I with several others petitioning the judge for it, and were put in hopes of it: but I soon saw so much, that I understood thereby it was not intended; which put me upon consulting the means of her escape, which, through the goodness of God, was effected, and she got to Rhode Island, but soon found herself not safe when there, by reason of the pursuit after her; from thence she went to New York, along with some others that had escaped their cruel hands, where we found his Excellency Benjamin Fletcher, Esq. , Governor, who was very courteous to us. After this, some of my goods were seized in a friend's hands, with whom I had left them, and myself imprisoned by the sheriff, and kept in custody half a day, and then dismissed; but to speak of their usage of the prisoners, and the inhumanity shown to them at the time of their execution, no sober Christian could bear. They had also trials of cruel mockings, which is the more, considering what a people for religion, I mean the profession of it, we have been; those that suffered being many of them church members, and most of them unspotted in their conversation, till their adversary the Devil took up this method for accusing them. 

 JONATHAN CARY. "

The only account we have, written by one who had actually experienced, in his own person, what it was to fall into the hands of those who gotup and carried on the prosecutions, is the following. Captain Aldenhad probably been from an early stage in their operations in the eyeof the accusing girls. He was meant, perhaps, by what often fell fromthem about "the tall man in Boston. " We are left entirely toconjecture as to the reason why they singled him out, as not one ofthem, we may be quite sure, had ever seen him. It may be that someperson who had experienced discipline under his orders as a navalcommander bore him a grudge, and took pains to suggest his name to thegirls, and provided them with the coarse, vulgar, and ridiculousscandal they so recklessly poured out upon him:--

 "_An Account how John Alden, Sr. , was dealt with at Salem Village. _

 "John Alden, Sr. , of Boston, in the county of Suffolk, mariner, on the twenty-eighth day of May, 1692, was sent for by the magistrates of Salem, in the county of Essex, upon the accusation of a company of poor distracted or possessed creatures or witches; and, being sent by Mr. Stoughton, arrived there on the 31st of May, and appeared at Salem Village before Mr. Gedney, Mr. Hathorne, and Mr. Corwin. 

 "Those wenches being present who played their juggling tricks, falling down, crying out, and staring in people's faces, the magistrates demanded of them several times, who it was, of all the people in the room, that hurt them. One of these accusers pointed several times at one Captain Hill, there present, but spake nothing. The same accuser had a man standing at her back to hold her up. He stooped down to her ear: then she cried out, 'Alden, Alden afflicted her. ' One of the magistrates asked her if she had ever seen Alden. She answered, 'No. ' He asked her how she knew it was Alden. She said the man told her so. 

 "Then all were ordered to go down into the street, where a ring was made; and the same accuser cried out, 'There stands Alden, a bold fellow, with his hat on before the judges: he sells powder and shot to the Indians and French, and lies with the Indian squaws, and has Indian papooses. ' Then was Alden committed to the marshal's custody, and his sword taken from him; for they said he afflicted them with his sword. After some hours, Alden was sent for to the meeting-house in the Village, before the magistrates, who required Alden to stand upon a chair, to the open view of all the people. 

 "The accusers cried out that Alden pinched them then, when he stood upon the chair, in the sight of all the people, a good way distant from them. One of the magistrates bid the marshal to hold open Alden's hands, that he might not pinch those creatures. Alden asked them why they should think that he should come to that village to afflict those persons that he never knew or saw before. Mr. Gedney bid Alden to confess, and give glory to God. Alden said he hoped he should give glory to God, and hoped he should never gratify the Devil: but appealed to all that ever knew him, if they ever suspected him to be such a person; and challenged any one that could bring in any thing on their own knowledge, that might give suspicion of his being such an one. Mr. Gedney said he had known Alden many years, and had been at sea with him, and always looked upon him to be an honest man; but now he saw cause to alter his judgment. Alden answered, he was sorry for that, but he hoped God would clear up his innocency, that he would recall that judgment again; and added, that he hoped that he should, with Job, maintain his integrity till he died. They bid Alden look upon the accusers, which he did, and then they fell down. Alden asked Mr. Gedney what reason there could be given why Alden's looking upon _him_ did not strike _him_ down as well; but no reason was given that I heard. But the accusers were brought to Alden to touch them; and this touch, they said, made them well. Alden began to speak of the providence of God in suffering these creatures to accuse innocent persons. Mr. Noyes asked Alden why he should offer to speak of the providence of God: God, by his providence (said Mr. Noyes), governs the world, and keeps it in peace; and so went on with discourse, and stopped Alden's mouth as to that. Alden told Mr. Gedney that he could assure him that there was a lying spirit in them; for I can assure you that there is not a word of truth in all these say of me. But Alden was again committed to the marshal, and his _mittimus_ written. 

 "To Boston Alden was carried by a constable: no bail would be taken for him, but was delivered to the prison-keeper, where he remained fifteen weeks; and then, observing the manner of trials, and evidence then taken, was at length prevailed with to make his escape. 

 "Per JOHN ALDEN. "

Alden made his escape about the middle of September, at the bloodiestcrisis of the tragedy, and just before the execution of nine of thevictims, including that of Giles Corey. He is understood to have fledto Duxbury, where his relatives secreted him. He made his appearanceamong them late at night; and, on their asking an explanation of hisunexpected visit at that hour, replied that he was flying from theDevil, and the Devil was after him. After a while, when the delusionhad abated, and people were coming to their senses, he deliveredhimself up, and was bound over to the Superior Court at Boston, thelast Tuesday in April, 1693, when, no one appearing to prosecute, he, with some hundred and fifty others, was discharged by proclamation, and all judicial proceedings brought to a close. It is to be feared, that ever after, to his dying day, when the subject of his experienceon the 31st of May, 1692, was referred to, the old sailor indulged inrather strong expressions in relating his reminiscences of Rev. "Mr. Nicholas Noyes, " "Mr. Bartholomew Gedney, " and the "wenches" of SalemVillage. 

Captain John Alden was a son of John Alden, ever memorable as one ofthe first founders of Plymouth Colony. He had been for more thanthirty years a resident of Boston, a member of the church, and in allrespects a leading and distinguished man. For some time, he had beencommander of the armed vessel belonging to the colony, and was a braveand efficient officer and an able and experienced mariner. He hadseen service in French and Indian wars, had acted two years before, that is in 1690, as commissioner in conducting negotiations with thenative tribes, and, at a later period, was charged with importanttrusts as a naval commander. He was a man of large property, andseventy years of age. He was, as well he might be, utterly confoundedand amazed in finding himself charged as a principal culprit in theSalem witchcraft. The accusing girls were evidently delighted to gethold of such a notable and doughty character; and their tongues werereleased, on the occasion, from all restraints of decorum and decency. When the ring was formed around him "in the street, " in front ofDeacon Ingersoll's door, his sword unbuckled from his side, and suchfoul and vulgar aspersions cast upon his good name, he felt, no doubt, that it would have been better to have fallen into the hands ofsavages of the wilderness or pirates on the sea, than of the crowd ofaudacious girls that hustled him about in Salem Village. It was arelief to his wounded honor, and gave leisure for the workings of hisindignant resentment, to escape from them into Boston jail. Not onlyhis old shipmate, Bartholomew Gedney, but, as will be seen, thelearned attorney-general, who was present, and witnessed the wholeaffair, was fully convinced of his guilt. 

The wife of an honest and worthy man in Andover was sick of a fever. After all the usual means had failed to check the symptoms of herdisease, the idea became prevalent that she was suffering under an"evil hand. " The husband, pursuant of the advice of friends, posteddown to Salem Village to ascertain from the afflicted girls who wasbewitching his wife. Two of them returned with him to Andover. Neverdid a place receive such fatal visitors. The Grecian horse did notbring greater consternation to ancient Ilium. Immediately after theirarrival, they succeeded in getting more than fifty of the inhabitantsinto prison, several of whom were hanged. A perfect panic swept like ahurricane over the place. The idea seized all minds, as Hutchinsonexpresses it, that the only "way to prevent an accusation was tobecome an accuser. "--"The number of the afflicted increased every day, and the number of the accused in proportion. " In this state of things, such a great accession being made to the ranks of the confessingwitches, the power of the delusion became irresistibly strengthened. Mr. Dudley Bradstreet, the magistrate of the place, after havingcommitted about forty persons to jail, concluded he had done enough, and declined to arrest any more. The consequence was that he and hiswife were cried out upon, and they had to fly for their lives. Theyaccused his brother, John Bradstreet, with having "afflicted" a dog. Bradstreet escaped by flight. The dog was executed. The number ofpersons who had publicly confessed that they had entered into a leaguewith Satan, and exercised the diabolical power thus acquired, to theinjury, torment, and death of innocent parties, produced a profoundeffect upon the public mind. At the same time, the accusers hadeverywhere increased in number, owing to the inflamed state ofimagination universally prevalent which ascribed all ailments ordiseases to the agency of witches, to a mere love of notoriety and apassion for general sympathy, to a desire to be secure against thecharge of bewitching others, or to a malicious disposition to wreakvengeance upon enemies. The prisons in Salem, Ipswich, Boston, andCambridge, were crowded. All the securities of society were dissolved. Every man's life was at the mercy of every other man. Fear sat onevery countenance, terror and distress were in all hearts, silencepervaded the streets; all who could, quit the country; business was ata stand; a conviction sunk into the minds of men, that a dark andinfernal confederacy had got foot-hold in the land, threatening tooverthrow and extirpate religion and morality, and establish thekingdom of the Prince of darkness in a country which had beendedicated, by the prayers and tears and sufferings of its piousfathers, to the Church of Christ and the service and worship of thetrue God. The feeling, dismal and horrible indeed, became general, that the providence of God was removed from them; that Satan was letloose, and he and his confederates had free and unrestrained power togo to and fro, torturing and destroying whomever he willed. We cannot, by any extent of research or power of imagination, enter fully intothe ideas of the people of that day; and it is therefore absolutelyimpossible to appreciate the awful condition of the community at thepoint of time to which our narrative has led us. 

In the midst of this state of things, the old colony of Massachusettswas transformed into a royal province, and a new government organized. Sir William Phips, the governor, arrived at Boston, with the newcharter, on the evening of the 14th of May. William Stoughton, ofDorchester, superseded Thomas Danforth as deputy-governor. In theCouncil, which took the place of the Assistants, most of the formerbody were retained. Bartholomew Gedney had a few years before beendropped from the board of Assistants. He was now placed in the Councilwith John Hathorne, Jonathan Corwin, Samuel Appleton, and Robert Pike, of this county. The new government did not interfere with theproceedings in progress relating to the witchcraft prosecutions, atthe moment. Examinations and commitments went on as before; only themagistrates, acting on those occasions, were re-enforced by Mr. Gedney, who presided at their sessions. The affair had become soformidable, and the public infatuation had reached such a point, thatit was difficult to determine what ought to be done. Sir WilliamPhips, no doubt, felt that it was beyond his depth, and yieldedhimself to the views of the leading men of his council. Stoughton wasin full sympathy with Cotton Mather, whose interest had been used inprocuring his appointment over Danforth. Through him, Mather acquired, and held for some time, great ascendency with the governor. It wasconcluded best to appoint a special court of Oyer and Terminer for thewitchcraft trials. Stoughton, the deputy-governor, was commissioned aschief-justice. Nathaniel Saltonstall of Haverhill; Major John Richardsof Boston; Major Bartholomew Gedney of Salem; Mr. Wait Winthrop, Captain Samuel Sewall, and Mr. Peter Sargent, all three ofBoston, --were made associate judges. Saltonstall early withdrew fromthe service; and Jonathan Corwin, of Salem, succeeded to his place onthe bench of the special court. A majority of the judges were citizensof Boston. 

Jonathan Corwin had been associated with Hathorne in conducting theexaminations that have been described. He was a son of George Corwin, who has been noticed in the account of Salem Village. 

A shade of illegality rests upon the very existence of this specialcourt. There has always been a question whether the new charter gaveto the governor and council power to create it without the concurrenceof the House of Representatives. It has been held that such a courtcould have no other lawful foundation than an act of the GeneralCourt. Hutchinson was evidently of this opinion. This question was avery serious one; for, as that considerate and able historian andeminent judicial officer says, the tribunal that passed sentence inthe witchcraft prosecutions was "the most important court to the lifeof the subject which was ever held in the province. " The time requiredto convene the popular branch of the government is itself, in allcases, an element of safety. In this case, it would have carried thecountry beyond the period of the delusion, and saved its annals fromtheir darkest and bloodiest page. The condition of things when hearrived, had his counsellors been wise, would have led Sir WilliamPhips forthwith to issue writs of election of deputies, before takingany action whatever. In a free republican government, the executivedepartment ought never to attempt to dispose of difficult matters ofvital importance without the joint deliberations and responsibility ofthe representatives of the people. 

So far as the composition of the court is considered, no objection canbe made. The justices were all members of the council, and belonged tothe highest order, not only of the magistracy, but of societygenerally. They constituted as respectable a body of gentlemen ascould have been collected. Thomas Newton, of Boston, was commissionedto act as attorney-general. The official title of marshal ceasing withthe new government, George Corwin was appointed sheriff of the countyof Essex. Herrick appears to have continued in the service as deputy. Sheriff Corwin was twenty-six years of age. He was the grandson of theoriginal George Corwin, and the son of John. His mother wasgrand-daughter of Governor Winthrop of Massachusetts, and daughter ofGovernor Winthrop of Connecticut. His wife was a daughter ofBartholomew Gedney; so that it appears that two of the judges were hisuncles, and one his father-in-law. These personal connections may beborne in mind, as affording ground to believe, that, in the dischargeof his painful duties, he did not act without advice and suggestionsfrom the highest quarter. 

The court-house in which the trials were held stood in the middle ofwhat is now Washington Street, near where Lynde and Church Streets, which did not then exist, now enter it, fronting towards Essex Street. The building was also used as a town-house; Washington Street being, for this reason, then called "Town-house Lane. " Off against thecourt-house, on the west side of the lane, was the house of the Rev. Nicholas Noyes, on the site of the residence of the late RobertBrookhouse. Opposite to it was the estate of Edward Bishop, whichfronted westerly on "Town-house Lane" a little over a hundred feet, including the present Jeffrey Court, and extending a few feet beyondthe corner of the house of Dr. S. M. Cate, over a portion of ChurchStreet. Its depth, towards St. Peter Street, was about three hundredand forty-five feet. Edward Bishop held this estate in the right ofhis wife Bridget, the widow of Thomas Oliver who had died about 1679. Not long after this marriage, Bishop removed to his farm at RoyalSide. In 1685, the "old Oliver house" was either removed or rebuilt, and a new one erected on the same premises, which was occupied bytenants in 1692. These items are given because they will help toillustrate the narrative, and enable us to understand points ofevidence in the approaching trial. It is a curious circumstance, thatthe first public victim of the prosecutions, Bridget Bishop, had beenthe nearest neighbor and lived directly opposite, to the person who, more than any other inhabitant of the town, was responsible for theblood that was shed, --Nicholas Noyes. The jail, at that time, was onthe western side of Prison Lane, now St. Peter Street, north of thepoint where Federal Street now enters it. The meeting-house stood onwhat has always been the site of the First Church. The "Ship Tavern"was on ground the front of which is occupied, at present, by "West'sBlock, " nearly opposite the head of Central Street. It had long beenowned and kept by John Gedney, Sr. Two of his sons, John andBartholomew, had married Susanna and Hannah Clarke. John died in 1685. His widow moved into the family of her father-in-law; and, after hisdeath in 1688, continued to keep the house. In 1698 she was married toDeliverance Parkman, and died in 1728. The tavern, in 1692, was knownas the "Widow Gedney's. " The estate had an extensive orchard in therear, contiguous, along its northern boundary, to the orchard ofBridget Bishop, which occupied ground now covered by the Lyceumbuilding, and one or two others to the east of it. 

The Court was opened at Salem in the first week of June, 1692. In themean time, the attorney-general, to prepare for the management of thecases, came to Salem. He addressed the following letter to IsaacAddington, Secretary of the province:--

 "SALEM, 31st May, 1692. 

 "WORTHY SIR, --I have herewith sent you the names of the prisoners that are desired to be transmitted by _habeas corpus_; and have presumed to send you a copy thereof, being more, as I presume, accustomed to that practice than yourself, and beg pardon if I have infringed upon you therein. I fear we shall not this week try all that we have sent for; by reason the trials will be tedious, and the afflicted persons cannot readily give their testimonies, being struck dumb and senseless, for a season, at the name of the accused. I have been all this day at the Village, with the gentlemen of the council, at the examination of the persons, where I have beheld strange things, scarce credible but to the spectators, and too tedious here to relate; and, amongst the rest, Captain Alden and Mr. English have their _mittimus_. I must say, according to the present appearances of things, they are as deeply concerned as the rest; for the afflicted spare no person of what quality soever, neither conceal their crimes, though never so heinous. We pray that Tituba the Indian, and Mrs. Thacher's maid, may be transferred as evidence, but desire they may not come amongst the prisoners but rather by themselves; with the records in the Court of Assistants, 1679, against Bridget Oliver, and the records relating to the first persons committed, left in Mr. Webb's hands by the order of the council. I pray pardon that I cannot now further enlarge; and, with my cordial service, only add that I am, sir, your most humble servant, [Illustration: [signature]]

Hutchinson says that there was no colony or province law againstwitchcraft in force when the trials began; and that the proceedingswere under an act of James the First, passed in 1603. By that act, persons convicted were to be sentenced to "the pains and penalties ofdeath as felons. " By the colonial law, conviction of capital crimesdid not incapacitate the party affected from disposing of property. Inthis and other respects, there were points of difference, which causedsome inconvenience in carrying out the practice of the mother-country;and the attorney-general had to supply the want of experience in thelocal officers. 

It may here be mentioned, that no record of the doings of this specialcourt are now to be found, and our only information respecting them isobtained in brief and imperfect statements of writers of the time. Perhaps Hutchinson had the use of the records. He gives the dates ofthe several sessions of the courts, and of the conviction andexecution of the prisoners. Some of the depositions sworn to in courtare on file, but without giving in many instances the date when thusoffered in the trials. In some cases, they state when they were laidbefore the grand jury. Only a small part of them are preserved. Thematter they contain was, to a considerable extent, brought forward atthe preliminary examinations, and has been already adduced. In thefollowing account of the trials, some further use will be made ofthese depositions. 

Bridget Bishop was the only person tried at the first session of theCourt. She was brought through Prison Lane, up Essex Street, by theFirst Church, into Town-house Lane, to the Court-house. Cotton Mathersays, --

 "There was one strange thing with which the court was newly entertained. As this woman was under a guard, passing by the great and spacious meeting-house, she gave a look towards the house; and immediately a demon, invisibly entering the meeting-house, tore down a part of it: so that, though there was no person to be seen there, yet the people, at the noise, running in, found a board, which was strongly fastened with several nails, transported into another quarter of the house. "

It is probable that the streets were thronged by crowds eager to get asight of the prisoner; and that the doors, fences, and house-tops wereoccupied. Some, perhaps, got into the meeting-house; and, inclambering up to the windows, a board may have been put inrequisition, and left misplaced. Incredible almost as it is, thiscircumstance seems, from Mather's language, --"the court wasentertained, "--to have been brought in evidence at the trial, andregarded as weighty and conclusive proof of Bridget's guilt. 

One or two points in the evidence adduced against her, in addition tothose mentioned heretofore, deserve consideration. The position taken, at her trial, by the Rev. John Hale of Beverly demands criticism. Thecharge of witchcraft had been made against her on more than oneoccasion before; particularly about the year 1687, when she residednear the bounds of Beverly, at Royal Side. A woman in theneighborhood, subject to fits of insanity, had, while passing intoone of them, brought the accusation against her; but, on the return ofher reason, solemnly recanted, and deeply lamented the aspersion. In aviolent recurrence of her malady, this woman committed suicide. Mr. Hale had examined the case at the time, and exonerated Bridget Bishop, who was a communicant in his church, from the charge made against herby the unhappy lunatic. He was satisfied, as he states, that "SisterBishop" was innocent, and in no way deserved to be ill thought of. Hehoped "better of said Goody Bishop at that time. " Without any pretenceof new evidence touching the facts of the case, he came into court in1692, and related them, to the effect and with the intent to make thembear against her. He described the appearance of the throat of thewoman, after death, as follows:--

 "As to the wounds she died of, I observed three deadly ones; a piece of her windpipe cut out, and another wound above that through the windpipe and gullet, and the vein they call jugular. So that I then judged and still do apprehend it impossible for her, with so short a pair of scissors, to mangle herself so without some extraordinary work of the Devil or witchcraft. "

If this was his impression at the time, it is strange that he did notthen say so. But there is no appearance of any criminal proceedingshaving been had, by the grand jury or otherwise, against "SisterBishop" on the occasion. On the contrary, Mr. Hale seems to haveacquiesced in the opinion, that the derangement of the woman wasaggravated, if not caused, by her being overmuch given to searchingand pondering upon the dark passages and mysterious imagery ofprophecy. The truth, in all probability, is, that Mr. Hale's suspicionwas an after-thought. The effect produced upon his mental condition bythe statements and actings of the "afflicted children" in 1692 wasunconsciously transferred to 1687. The delusion, in which he was thenfully participating, led him to put a different interpretation uponthe suicidal wounds and horrible end of the wretched maniac, five orsix years before. 

A piece of evidence, which illustrates the state of opinion at thattime, relating to our subject, given in this case, is worthy ofnotice. Samuel Shattuck was a hatter and dyer. His house was on thesouth side of Essex Street, opposite the western entrance to thegrounds of the North Church. Before her removal to the village, Bridget Bishop was in the habit of calling at Shattuck's to havearticles of dress dyed. He states that she treated him and his familypolitely and kindly; or, as he characterized her deportment after hismind had become jaundiced against her, "in a smooth and flatteringmanner. " He tells his story in a deposition written by him, and signedand sworn to in Court by himself and wife, June 2, 1692. It is asfollows:--

 "Our eldest child, who promised as much health and understanding, both by countenance and actions, as any other children of his years, was taken in a very drooping condition; and, as she came oftener to the house, he grew worse and worse. As he would be standing at the door, would fall out, and bruise his face upon a great step-stone, as if he had been thrust out by an invisible hand; oftentimes falling, and hitting his face against the sides of the house, bruising his face in a very miserable manner.... This child taken in a terrible fit, his mouth and eyes drawn aside, and gasped in such a manner as if he was upon the point of death. After this, he grew worse in his fits, and, out of them, would be almost always crying. That, for many months, he would be crying till nature's strength was spent, and then would fall asleep, and then awake, and fall to crying and moaning; and that his very countenance did bespeak compassion. And at length, we perceived his understanding decayed: so that we feared (as it has since proved) that he would be quite bereft of his wits; for, ever since, he has been stupefied and void of reason, his fits still following of him. After he had been in this kind of sickness some time, he has gone into the garden, and has got upon a board of an inch thick, which lay flat upon the ground, and we have called him; he would come to the edge of the board, and hold out his hand, and make as if he would come, but could not till he was helped off the board.... My wife has offered him a cake and money to come to her; and he has held out his hand, and reached after it, but could not come till he had been helped off the board, by which I judge some enchantment kept him on.... Ever since, this child hath been followed with grievous fits, as if he would never recover more; his head and eyes drawn aside so as if they would never come to rights more; lying as if he were, in a manner, dead; falling anywhere, either into fire or water, if he be not constantly looked to; and, generally, in such an uneasy, restless frame, almost always running to and fro, acting so strange that I cannot judge otherwise but that he is bewitched: and, by these circumstances, do believe that the aforesaid Bridget Oliver--now called Bishop--is the cause of it: and it has been the judgment of doctors, such as lived here and foreigners, that he is under an evil hand of witchcraft. "

The means used to give this direction to the suspicions of Shattuckand his wife are described in the notice of Bridget Bishop, in theFirst Part of this work. 

Shattuck was a son of the sturdy Quaker of that name who, thirty yearsbefore, had given the government of the colony so much trouble, andseems to have inherited some of his notions. In his deposition, hementions, as corroborative proof of Bridget Bishop's being a witch, that she used to bring to his dye-house "sundry pieces of lace, " ofshapes and dimensions entirely outside of his conceptions of whatcould be needed in the wardrobe, or for the toilet, of a plain andhonest woman. He evidently regarded fashionable and vain apparel as asnare and sign of the Devil. 

The imaginations of several persons in Shattuck's immediateneighborhood seem to have been wrought up to a high point againstBridget Bishop. John Cook lived on the south side of the street, directly opposite the eastern entrance to the grounds of the NorthChurch, on its present site. John Bly's house was on a lot contiguousto the rear of Cook's, fronting on Summer Street. One of Cook's sons(John), aged eighteen, testified, that, --

 "About five or six years ago, one morning about sun-rising, as I was in bed, before I rose, I saw Goodwife Bishop, _alias_ Oliver, stand in the chamber by the window: and she looked on me and grinned on me, and presently struck me on the side of the head, which did very much hurt me; and then I saw her go out under the end window at a little crevice, about so big as I could thrust my hand into. I saw her again the same day, --which was the sabbath-day, --about noon, walk across the room; and having, at the time, an apple in my hand, it flew out of my hand into my mother's lap, who sat six or eight foot distance from me, and then she disappeared: and, though my mother and several others were in the same room, yet they affirmed they saw her not. "

Bly and his wife Rebecca had a difficulty with Bishop in reference topayment for a hog they had bought of her. The following is from theirtestimony at her trial. After stating that she came to their house andquarrelled with them about it, they go on to say that the animal--

 "was taken with strange fits, jumping up, and knocking her head against the fence, and seemed blind and deaf, and would not eat, neither let her pigs suck, but foamed at the mouth; which Goody Henderson, hearing of, said she believed she was overlooked, and that they had their cattle ill in such a manner at the Eastward, when they lived there, and used to cure them by giving of them red ochre and milk, which we also gave the sow. Quickly after eating of which, she grew better; and then, for the space of near two hours together, she, getting into the street, did set off, jumping and running between the house of said deponents and said Bishop's, as if she were stark mad, and, after that, was well again: and we did then apprehend or judge, and do still, that said Bishop had bewitched said sow. "

William Stacey testified, that, as he was "agoing to mill, " meetingBishop in the street, some conversation passed between them, andthat, --

 "being gone about six rods from her, the said Bishop, with a small load in his cart, suddenly the off-wheel slumped or sunk down into a hole upon plain ground; that this deponent was forced to get one to help him get the wheel out. Afterwards, this deponent went back to look for said hole where his wheel sunk in, but could not find any hole. "

Stacey further deposed, that, on another occasion, he--

 "met the said Bishop by Isaac Stearns's brick-kiln. After he had passed by her, this deponent's horse stood still with a small load going up the hill; so that, the horse striving to draw, all his gears and tackling flew in pieces, and the cart fell down. "

These mishaps and marvels occurred in Summer Street, near the foot ofChestnut Street, where the ground was then much lower than it is now. Stacey was ascending the street, on his way through High Street to hisfather's mill, at the South River. 

Stacey concluded his testimony as follows:--

 "This deponent hath met with several other of her pranks at several times, which would take up a great time to tell of. 

 "This deponent doth verily believe that the said Bridget Bishop was instrumental to his daughter Priscilla's death. About two years ago, the child was a likely, thriving child; and suddenly screeched out, and so continued, in an unusual manner, for about a fortnight, and so died in that lamentable manner. "

Many of the extraordinary "pranks, " charged upon Bridget Bishop, hadtheir scene near to her dwelling-house. John Louder, a servant of JohnGedney, Sr. , some years before, had a controversy with her about herfowls, "that used to come into our orchard or garden. " He swore asfollows:--

 "Some little time after which, I, going well to bed, about the dead of the night, felt a great weight upon my breast, and, awakening, looked; and, it being bright moonlight, did clearly see said Bridget Bishop, or her likeness, sitting upon my stomach; and, putting my arms off of the bed to free myself from the great oppression, she presently laid hold of my throat, and almost choked me, and I had no strength or power in my hands to resist, or help myself; and, in this condition, she held me to almost day. Some time after this, my mistress (Susannah Gedney) was in our orchard, and I was then with her; and said Bridget Bishop, being then in her orchard, --which was next adjoining to ours, --my mistress told said Bridget that I said or affirmed that she came, one night, and sat upon my breast, as aforesaid, which she denied, and I affirmed to her face to be true, and that I did plainly see her; upon which discourse with her, she threatened me. And, some time after that, I, being not very well, stayed at home on a Lord's Day; and, on the afternoon of said day, the doors being shut, I did see a black pig in the room coming towards me; so I went towards it to kick it, and it vanished away. "

Louder goes on to say, that, immediately after this, on the sameoccasion while he was staying at home from meeting, he saw a blackthing jump into the window, and it came and stood just before his face"upon the bar. " The body of it looked like a monkey, only the feetwere like a cock's feet with claws, and the face somewhat more like aman's than a monkey's. He says that he was greatly affrighted, "notbeing able to speak or help myself by reason of fear, I suppose;" andthat his mysterious visitor made quite a speech to him, representingthat it was a messenger sent to say, that, if he would "be ruled byhim, he should want for nothing in this world. " The virtuous andindignant Louder says that he answered, "You devil, I will kill you!"and gave it a blow with his fist, but "could feel no substance; and itjumped out of the window again. " It immediately came in by the porch, although the doors were shut, and said, "You had better take mycounsel. " Hereupon Louder struck at it with a stick, hitting theground-sill and breaking the stick, but felt no substance. Louderconcludes his testimony as follows:--

 "The arm with which I struck was presently disenabled. Then it vanished away, and I opened the back-door and went out; and, going towards the house-end, I espied said Bridget Bishop in her orchard going towards her house, and, seeing her, had no power to set one foot forward, but returned in again: and, going to shut the door, I again did see that or the like creature, that I before did see within doors, in such a posture as it seemed to be agoing to fly at me; upon which I cried out, 'The whole armor of God be between me and you. ' So it sprang back and flew over the apple-tree, flinging the dirt with its feet against my stomach, upon which I was struck dumb, and so continued for about three days' time; and also shook many of the apples off from the tree which it flew over. "

Before removing to his farm, Edward and Bridget Bishop made thealterations, before mentioned, on their town estate. John Bly, Sr. , aged fifty-seven years, and William Bly, aged fifteen, were employedin the operation of removing the cellar wall of "the ould house;" andtestified, that they found in holes and crevices of said cellar wall"several puppets made up of rags and hogs' bristles, with headlesspins in them with the points outward. "

Upon such evidence, Bridget Bishop was condemned, and executed thenext week. The death-warrants, in these trials, were collectedtogether in one envelope, marked as such. The envelope remains, butits contents have all been abstracted. The death-warrant of BridgetBishop was probably overlooked when the others were gathered together. The consequence is that it has been preserved, and is the only oneknown to be in existence. 

The sheriff seems to have proceeded, immediately after the execution, to the clerk's office, and indorsed his return on the warrant. When hewrote it, he added, after the word "dead, "--"and buried her on thespot. " On its occurring to him that the burying of the body was notmentioned in the warrant, he drew his pen through the words; asis seen in the photograph. This superfluous clause, thus partiallyobliterated, is the only positive evidence we have of the disposal ofthe bodies at the time. They were undoubtedly all thrown into pits dugamong the rocks, on the spot, and hastily covered by the officershaving in charge the details of the executions. There were no prayersover their graves, except those uttered by themselves in their lastmoments. 

[Illustration: [death warrant]]

[Illustration: [return on warrant]]

The descendants of Bridget Bishop are very numerous in Salem;embracing some of our oldest and most respectable families, andbranching widely from them. There is no evidence of issue by her firstmarriage. Thomas Oliver, her second husband, had daughters by a formerwife, who were represented in the next generation under the names ofHilliard, Hooper, and Jones. By his wife Bridget, he had but onechild, --a daughter, Christian, born May 8, 1667. She married ThomasMason, and died in 1693; leaving an only child, Susannah, born August23, 1687. Edward Bishop was her guardian. She married John Becket in1711, and by him had a son, John, and six daughters, as follows:Susannah, married to David Felt, Elizabeth to William Peele, Sarah toNathaniel Silsbee, Rebecca to William Fairfield, Eunice to ThorndikeDeland, and Hannah to William Cloutman. 

After the condemnation of Bridget Bishop, the Court took a recess, andconsulted the ministers of Boston and the neighborhood respecting theprosecutions. The response of the reverend gentlemen, while urging, in general terms, the importance of caution and circumspection in themethods of examination, decidedly and earnestly recommended that theproceedings should be vigorously carried on; and they were, indeed, vigorously carried on. 

Hutchinson says, that, "at the first trial, there was no colony orprovincial law against witchcraft in force. The statute of James theFirst must therefore have been considered as in force in the province, witchcraft not being an offence at common law. Before the adjournment, the old colony law, which makes witchcraft a capital offence, wasrevived with the other local laws, as they were called, and made a lawof the province. " The General Court, which thus revived the law makingwitchcraft a capital offence, met, June 8, two days before theexecution of Bridget Bishop. The proceedings that took place at Salemwere thus assumed as a provincial matter, for which the immediatelocality was not responsible, but the legislature, clergy, and peopleof the country at large. 

The Court met again on Wednesday, the 29th of June; and, after trial, sentenced to death Sarah Good, Sarah Wildes, Elizabeth How, SusannaMartin, and Rebecca Nurse, who were all executed on the 19th of July. 

Calef says, that, at the trial of Sarah Good, --

 "One of the afflicted fell in a fit; and, after coming out of it, cried out of the prisoner for stabbing her in the breast with a knife, and that she had broken the knife in stabbing of her. Accordingly, a piece of the blade of a knife was found about her. Immediately, information being given to the Court, a young man was called, who produced a haft and part of the blade, which the Court, having viewed and compared, saw it to be the same; and, upon inquiry, the young man affirmed that yesterday he happened to break that knife, and that he cast away the upper part, --this afflicted person being then present. The young man was dismissed and she was bidden by the Court not to tell lies; and was improved after (as she had been before) to give evidence against the prisoners. "

Hutchinson, in relating this circumstance, refers to a case triedbefore Sir Matthew Hale, when a similar kind of falsehood was provedagainst an "afflicted" witness; notwithstanding which he says theperson on trial was found guilty, "and the judge and all the courtwere fully satisfied with the verdict. "

Sarah Good appears to have been an unfortunate woman, having beensubject to poverty, and consequent sadness and melancholy. But she wasnot wholly broken in spirit. Mr. Noyes, at the time of her execution, urged her very strenuously to confess. Among other things, he told her"she was a witch, and that she knew she was a witch. " She wasconscious of her innocence, and felt that she was oppressed, outraged, trampled upon, and about to be murdered, under the forms of law; andher indignation was roused against her persecutors. She could not bearin silence the cruel aspersion; and, although she was just about to belaunched into eternity, the torrent of her feelings could not berestrained, but burst upon the head of him who uttered the falseaccusation. "You are a liar, " said she. "I am no more a witch than youare a wizard; and, if you take away my life, God will give you bloodto drink. " Hutchinson says that, in his day, there was a traditionamong the people of Salem, and it has descended to the present time, that the manner of Mr. Noyes's death strangely verified the predictionthus wrung from the incensed spirit of the dying woman. He wasexceedingly corpulent, of a plethoric habit, and died of an internalhemorrhage, bleeding profusely at the mouth. 

We have no information relating to the execution of Elizabeth How. Hergentle, patient, humble, benignant, devout, and tender heart bore her, no doubt, with a spirit of saint-like love and faith, through thedreadful scenes. We cannot doubt, that, in death as in life, sheforgave, prayed for, and invoked blessing upon her persecutors. Neither has any thing come down in reference to the deportment ofSarah Wildes or Susanna Martin. We may take it for granted, that theformer was a patient and humble, but firm and faithful sufferer; andthat the latter displayed the great energy of spirit, and probably thestrength of language, for which she was remarkable. Of the case ofRebecca Nurse we have more information. 

The character, age, and position of this venerable matron created animpression, which called, to the utmost, all the arts and efforts ofthe prosecution to counteract. Many who had gone fully and earnestlyin support of the proceedings against others paused and hesitated inreference to her; and large numbers who had been overawed into silencebefore, bravely came forward in her defence. The character ofNathaniel Putnam has been described. He was a man of extraordinarystrength and acuteness of mind, and in all his previous life had beenproof against popular excitement. The death of his brother Thomas, seven years before, had left him the head and patriarch of his greatfamily: as such, he was known as "Landlord Putnam. " Entire confidencewas felt by all in his judgment, and deservedly. But he was a strongreligionist, a life-long member of the Church, and extremely strenuousand zealous in his ecclesiastical relations. He was getting to be anold man; and Mr. Parris had wholly succeeded in obtaining, for thetime, possession of his feelings, sympathy, and zeal in the managementof the Church, and secured his full co-operation in the witchcraftprosecutions. He had been led by Parris to take the very front in theproceedings. But even Nathaniel Putnam could not stand by in silence, and see Rebecca Nurse sacrificed. A curious paper, written by him, isamong those which have been preserved:--

 "NATHANIEL PUTNAM, Sr. , being desired by Francis Nurse, Sr. , to give information of what I could say concerning his wife's life and conversation, I, the abovesaid, have known this said aforesaid woman forty years, and what I have observed of her, human frailties excepted, her life and conversation have been according to her profession; and she hath brought up a great family of children and educated them well, so that there is in some of them apparent savor of godliness. I have known her differ with her neighbors; but I never knew or heard of any that did accuse her of what she is now charged with. "

A similar paper was signed by thirty-nine other persons of the villageand the immediate vicinity, all of the highest respectability. The menand women who dared to do this act of justice must not be forgotten:--

 "We whose names are hereunto subscribed, being desired by Goodman Nurse to declare what we know concerning his wife's conversation for time past, --we can testify, to all whom it may concern, that we have known her for many years; and, according to our observation, her life and conversation were according to her profession, and we never had any cause or grounds to suspect her of any such thing as she is now accused of. 

 "ISRAEL PORTER. SAMUEL ABBEY. ELIZABETH PORTER. HEPZIBAH REA. EDWARD BISHOP, Sr. DANIEL ANDREW. HANNAH BISHOP. SARAH ANDREW. JOSHUA REA. DANIEL REA. SARAH REA. SARAH PUTNAM. SARAH LEACH. JONATHAN PUTNAM. JOHN PUTNAM. LYDIA PUTNAM. REBECCA PUTNAM. WALTER PHILLIPS, Sr. JOSEPH HUTCHINSON, Sr. NATHANIEL FELTON, Sr. LYDIA HUTCHINSON. MARGARET PHILLIPS. WILLIAM OSBURN. TABITHA PHILLIPS. HANNAH OSBURN. JOSEPH HOULTON, Jr. JOSEPH HOLTON, Sr. SAMUEL ENDICOTT. SARAH HOLTON. ELIZABETH BUXTON. BENJAMIN PUTNAM. SAMUEL ABORN, Sr. SARAH PUTNAM. ISAAC COOK. JOB SWINNERTON. ELIZABETH COOK. ESTHER SWINNERTON. JOSEPH PUTNAM. " JOSEPH HERRICK, Sr. 

An examination of the foregoing names in connection with the historyof the Village will show conclusive proof, that, if the matter hadbeen left to the people there, it would never have reached the pointto which it was carried. It was the influence of the magistracy andthe government of the colony, and the public sentiment prevalentelsewhere, overruling that of the immediate locality, that drove onthe storm. 

Israel Porter was the head of a great and powerful family. His wifeElizabeth was, as has been stated, a sister of Hathorne, the examiningmagistrate. Edward and Hannah Bishop were the venerable heads andfounders of a large family. They lived in Beverly, and must each havebeen about ninety years of age. The list contains the names of theheads of the principal families in the village, --such as John andRebecca Putnam, the Hutchinsons, Reas, Leaches, Houltons, andHerricks; and, in the neighborhood, such as the Feltons, Osbornes, andSamuel Endicott. The most remarkable fact it discloses is that itcontains the name of one of the two complainants who procured thewarrant against Rebecca Nurse, --Jonathan Putnam, the eldest son ofJohn; and also of his wife Lydia. Subsequent reflection, and thereturn of his better judgment, satisfied him that he had done a greatwrong to an innocent and worthy person; and he had the manliness tocome out in her favor. This document ought to have been effectual insaving the life of Rebecca Nurse. It will for ever vindicate hercharacter, and reflect honor upon each and every name subscribed toit. 

One of the most cruel features in the prosecution of the witchcrafttrials, and which was practised in all countries where they tookplace, was the examination of the bodies of the prisoners by a jury ofthe same sex, under the direction and in the presence of a surgeon orphysician. The person was wholly exposed, and every part subjected tothe most searching scrutiny. The process was always an outrage uponhuman nature; and in the cases of the victims on this occasion, manyof them of venerable years and delicate feelings, it was shocking toevery natural and instinctive sentiment. There is reason to fear thatit was often conducted in a rough, coarse, and brutal manner. MarshalHerrick testifies, that, "by order of Their Majesties' justices, " he, accompanied by the jail-keeper Dounton, and Constable Joseph Neal, made an examination of the body of George Jacobs. In persons of hisgreat age, there would, in all likelihood, be shrivelled, desiccated, and callous places. They found one on the old man, under his rightshoulder. Herrick made oath that it was a veritable witch teat, andhis deposition describes it as follows: "About a quarter of an inchlong or better, with a sharp point drooping downwards, so that I tooka pin, and run it through the said teat; but there was neither water, blood, or corruption, nor any other matter. " As proof positive thatthis was "the Devil's mark, " Herrick and the turnkey testify that "thesaid Jacobs was not in the least sensible of what had been done"!

The mind loathes the thought of handling in this way refined andsensitive females of matronly character, or persons of either sex, with infirmities of body rendered sacred by years. The results of theexamination were reduced to written reports, going into details, and, among other evidences in the trials, spread before the Court andjury. [A]

[Footnote A: A few days before her trial, Rebecca Nurse was subjectedto this inspection and exploration; and the jury of women found thewitch-mark upon her. On the 28th of June, two days before the meetingof the Court, she addressed to that body the followingcommunication:--

 "_To the Honored Court of Oyer and Terminer, now sitting in Salem, this 28th of June, Anno 1692. _

 "The humble petition of Rebecca Nurse, of Salem Village, humbly showeth: That whereas some women did search your petitioner at Salem, as I did then conceive for some supernatural mark; and then one of the said women, which is known to be the most ancient, skilful, prudent person of them all as to any such concern, did express herself to be of a contrary opinion from the rest, and did then declare that she saw nothing in or about Your Honor's poor petitioner but what might arise from a natural cause, --I there rendered the said persons a sufficient known reason as to myself of the moving cause thereof, which was by exceeding weaknesses, descending partly from an overture of nature, and difficult exigencies that hath befallen me in the times of my travails. And therefore your petitioner humbly prays that Your Honors would be pleased to admit of some other women to inquire into this great concern, those that are most grave, wise, and skilful; namely, Mrs. Higginson, Sr. , Mrs. Buxton, Mrs. Woodbury, --two of them being midwives, Mrs. Porter, together with such others as may be chosen on that account, before I am brought to my trial. All which I hope your honors will take into your prudent consideration, and find it requisite so to do; for my life lies now in your hands, under God. And, being conscious of my own innocency, I humbly beg that I may have liberty to manifest it to the world partly by the means abovesaid. 

 "And your poor petitioner shall evermore pray, as in duty bound, &c. "

Her daughters--Rebecca, wife of Thomas Preston; and Mary, wife of JohnTarbell--presented the following statement:--

 "We whose names are underwritten--can testify, if called to it, that Goody Nurse hath been troubled with an infirmity of body for many years, which the jury of women seem to be afraid it should be something else. "

There is no intimation, in any of the papers, that the petition of themother or the deposition of her daughters received the least attentionfrom the Court. ]

The evidence in the case of Rebecca Nurse was made up of the usualrepresentations and actings of the "afflicted children. " Mary Walcotand Abigail Williams charged her with having committed severalmurders; mentioning particularly Benjamin Houlton, John Harwood, andRebecca Shepard, and averring that she was aided therein by her sisterCloyse. Mr. Parris, too, gave in a deposition against her; from whichit appears, that, a certain person being sick, Mercy Lewis was sentfor. She was struck dumb on entering the chamber. She was asked tohold up her hand, if she saw any of the witches afflicting thepatient. Presently she held up her hand, then fell into a trance; andafter a while, coming to herself, said that she saw the spectres ofGoody Nurse and Goody Carrier having hold of the head of the sick man. Mr. Parris swore to this statement with the utmost confidence inMercy's declarations. 

The testimony of three persons particularly is required to be given, as illustrating the extraordinary extent to which the minds of thoseinvolved in the affair were under infatuation or hallucination. 

Mrs. Ann Putnam was about thirty years of age. For six months she hadbeen constantly absorbed in what was then, as now, regarded asspiritualism. Her house had been the scene of a perpetual series ofwonders supposed to be disclosures and manifestations of asupernatural character. Apparitions, spectral shapes of livingwitches, ghosts of their murdered victims, and demons generally, wereof daily and hourly occurrence. The dread secrets of the world unknownhad been revealed to her in waking fancies and dreams by night. Anoriginally sensitive and imaginative nature had been wrought into acondition in which her mental faculties were at once enfeebled andexalted. Besides all this, there were the trials to which herconstitution had been subjected by the experiences of maternity soearly begun, and the pressure upon her mind and heart of the anxietiesand cares incident to a large family of young children. Anaccumulation of disappointments, vexations, and consuming griefs, spread like a dark cloud over her life, --the deaths of her ownchildren, and of her sister Bayley and her children, and of her sisterBaker's children; and, finally, the long-continued, and constantlyrecurring sufferings, tortures, convulsions, fits, and trances of herdaughter Ann, and her servant-woman Mercy Lewis, under, as she fullybelieved, a diabolical hand. --These things must have given to hercountenance and tones of voice a wonderful impressiveness to all wholooked upon or listened to them. Her eminent social position, hergeneral reputation, --for Lawson, who knew her well, calls her "a verysober and pious woman, " so far as he could judge, --the stamp ofprofound earnestness marked on all her language, the glow whichmorbid excitement long experienced gave to her expression, must havearrested, to a high degree, the attention of the assembled multitude. An air of sadness, in the wild ravings of imagination, pervades hertestimony. I present her deposition in full, as one of the phenomenaof this strange transaction:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF ANN PUTNAM, the wife of Thomas Putnam, aged about thirty years, who testifieth and saith, that, on the 18th March, 1692, I being wearied out in helping to tend my poor afflicted child and maid, about the middle of the afternoon I lay me down on the bed to take a little rest; and immediately I was almost pressed and choked to death, that, had it not been for the mercy of a gracious God and the help of those that were with me, I could not have lived many moments: and presently I saw the apparition of Martha Corey, who did torture me so as I cannot express, ready to tear me all to pieces, and then departed from me a little while; but, before I could recover strength or well take breath, the apparition of Martha Corey fell upon me again with dreadful tortures, and hellish temptation to go along with her. And she also brought to me a little red book in her hand and a black pen, urging me vehemently to write in her book; and several times that day she did most grievously torture me, almost ready to kill me. And, on the 19th March, Martha Corey again appeared to me; and also Rebecca Nurse, the wife of Francis Nurse, Sr. : and they both did torture me a great many times this day with such tortures as no tongue can express, because I would not yield to their hellish temptations, that, had I not been upheld by an Almighty arm, I could not have lived while night. The 20th March, being sabbath-day, I had a great deal of respite between my fits. 21st March, being the day of the examination of Martha Corey, I had not many fits, though I was very weak; my strength being, as I thought, almost gone: but, on the 22d March, 1692, the apparition of Rebecca Nurse did again set upon me in a most dreadful manner, very early in the morning, as soon as it was well light. And now she appeared to me only in her shift, and brought a little red book in her hand, urging me vehemently to write in her book; and, because I would not yield to her hellish temptations, she threatened to tear my soul out of my body, blasphemously denying the blessed God, and the power of the Lord Jesus Christ to save my soul; and denying several places of Scripture which I told her of, to repel her hellish temptations. And for near two hours together, at this time, the apparition of Rebecca Nurse did tempt and torture me, and also the greater part of this day, with but very little respite. 23d March, am again afflicted by the apparitions of Rebecca Nurse and Martha Corey, but chiefly by Rebecca Nurse. 24th March, being the day of the examination of Rebecca Nurse, I was several times afflicted in the morning by the apparition of Rebecca Nurse, but most dreadfully tortured by her in the time of her examination, insomuch that the honored magistrates gave my husband leave to carry me out of the meeting-house; and, as soon as I was carried out of the meeting-house doors, it pleased Almighty God, for his free grace and mercy's sake, to deliver me out of the paws of those roaring lions, and jaws of those tearing bears, that, ever since that time, they have not had power so to afflict me until this 31st May, 1692. At the same moment that I was hearing my evidence read by the honored magistrates, to take my oath, I was again re-assaulted and tortured by my before-mentioned tormentor, Rebecca Nurse. "

 "THE TESTIMONY OF ANN PUTNAM, Jr. , witnesseth and saith, that, being in the room when her mother was afflicted, she saw Martha Corey, Sarah Cloyse, and Rebecca Nurse, or their apparition, upon her mother. "

Mrs. Ann Putnam made another deposition under oath, at the same trial, which shows that she was determined to overwhelm the prisoner by themultitude of her charges. She says that Rebecca Nurse's apparitiondeclared to her that "she had killed Benjamin Houlton, John Fuller, and Rebecca Shepard;" and that she and her sister Cloyse, and EdwardBishop's wife, had killed young John Putnam's child; and she furtherdeposed as followeth:--

 "Immediately there did appear to me six children in winding-sheets, which called me aunt, which did most grievously affright me; and they told me that they were my sister Baker's children of Boston; and that Goody Nurse, and Mistress Carey of Charlestown, and an old deaf woman at Boston, had murdered them, and charged me to go and tell these things to the magistrates, or else they would tear me to pieces, for their blood did cry for vengeance. Also there appeared to me my own sister Bayley and three of her children in winding-sheets, and told me that Goody Nurse had murdered them. "

There is in this deposition a passage which illustrates one of thedoctrines held at the time on the subject of witchcraft. Mrs. AnnPutnam "testifieth and saith, that, on the first day of June, 1692, the apparition of Rebecca Nurse did again fall upon me, and almostchoke me; and she told me, that, now she was come out of prison, shehad power to afflict me, and that now she would afflict me all thisday long. " The reference here is probably to the fact, that, on the1st of June, she with many other prisoners was transferred from thejail in Boston to that in Salem; and that, "all that day long" beingoutside of prison walls, she had greater power to afflict than whenchained in a cell. This was undoubtedly the received opinion, and itis curiously illustrated in the foregoing passage. 

The only breath of disparagement against the character of GoodwifeNurse that can be found in any of the papers is in the followingdeposition:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF SARAH HOULTON, relict of Benjamin Houlton, deceased, who testifieth and saith, that, about this time three years, my dear and loving husband, Benjamin Houlton, deceased, was as well as ever I knew him in my life till one Saturday morning, that Rebecca Nurse, who now stands charged for witchcraft, came to our house, and fell a railing at him because our pigs got into her field. Though our pigs were sufficiently yoked, and their fence was down in several places, yet all we could say to her could no ways pacify her; but she continued railing and scolding a great while together, calling to her son Benj. Nurse to go and get a gun and kill our pigs, and let none of them go out of the field, though my poor husband gave her never a misbeholding word. And, within a short time after this, my poor husband going out very early in the morning, as he was coming in again, he was taken with a strange fit in the entry; being struck blind and stricken down two or three times, so that, when he came to himself, he told me he thought he should never have come into the house any more. And, all summer after, he continued in a languishing condition, being much pained at his stomach, and often struck blind: but, about a fortnight before he died, he was taken with strange and violent fits, acting much like to our poor bewitched persons when we thought they would have died; and the doctor that was with him could not find what his distemper was. And, the day before he died, he was very cheerly; but, about midnight, he was again most violently seized upon with violent fits, till the next night, about midnight, he departed this life by a cruel death. 

 "_Jurat in Curia. _"

In explanation of the import of this testimony, it is to be observed, that the estate of Benjamin Houlton was contiguous to that of FrancisNurse. They were separated by a fence, which, as in such cases, wasrequired for half its length to be kept in order by one party, theremaining half by the other. What the exact facts were cannot beascertained, as we have the story of one side only. The widow Houltonappears to have been a tender-hearted, and, for aught we know, goodwoman. Some years afterwards, she was married, as his second wife, toBenjamin Putnam, --a very respectable person, and, on the death of hisfather Nathaniel, the head of that branch of the family. He was, formany years, deacon of the church. But she was, it must be conceded, aprejudiced witness; and her judgment for the time was whollybeclouded by the prevalent superstitions. The garden had been, fromthe days of Townsend Bishop, a choice portion of the Nurse estate. Inall farms, it was a most important and valuable item; and wasgenerally under the special care and management of the wife, daughters, and younger lads of the husbandman. Rebecca Nurse was anefficient helpmeet; contributing her whole share to the success of thegreat enterprise of clearing the estate, as well as in bringing up andeducating a large family. It was, no doubt, very provoking to her, asit would be to any one, to have vegetable and flower beds devastatedby the ravages of a neighbor's stray pigs. To what extent her "railingand scolding" went, she was not allowed to contribute her statement, to enable us to judge. The affair probably produced considerablegossip, and seems to be alluded to in Nathaniel Putnam's certificatein behalf of Rebecca Nurse. There is reason to believe that the widowHoulton was one of the first to realize what great injustice had beendone by her and others to the good name of Rebecca Nurse. 

Notwithstanding this evidence, so deeply were the jury impressed withthe eminent virtue and true Christian excellence of this venerablewoman, that, in spite of the clamors of the outside crowd, themonstrous statements of accusing witnesses, and the strong leaning ofthe Court against her, the jury brought in a verdict of "Not guilty. "Calef, and Hutchinson after him, describe the effect, and whatfollowed:--

 "Immediately, all the accusers in the Court, and, suddenly after, all the afflicted out of Court, made an hideous outcry; to the amazement, not only of the spectators, but the Court also seemed strangely surprised. One of the judges expressed himself not satisfied: another of them, as he was going off the bench, said they would have her indicted anew. The chief-justice said he would not impose on the jury, but intimated as if they had not well considered one expression of the prisoner when she was upon trial; viz. , that when one Hobbs, who had confessed herself to be a witch, was brought into Court to witness against her, the prisoner, turning her head to her, said, 'What! do you bring her? She is one of us;' or words to that effect. This, together with the clamors of the accusers, induced the jury to go out again, after their verdict, 'Not guilty. '"

The foreman of the jury, Thomas Fisk, made this statement on the 4thof July, a few days after the trial:--

 "After the honored Court had manifested their dissatisfaction of the verdict, several of the jury declared themselves desirous to go out again, and thereupon the Court gave leave; but, when we came to consider the case, I could not tell how to take her words as an evidence against her, till she had a further opportunity to put her sense upon them, if she would take it. And then, going into Court, I mentioned the words aforesaid, which by one of the Court were affirmed to have been spoken by her, she being then at the bar, but made no reply nor interpretation of them; whereupon these words were to me a principal evidence against her. "

Upon being informed of the use made of her words, the prisoner put inthe following declaration:--

 "These presents do humbly show to the honored Court and jury, that I being informed that the jury brought me in guilty upon my saying that Goodwife Hobbs and her daughter were of our company; but I intended no otherwise than as they were prisoners with us, and therefore did then, and yet do, judge them not legal evidence against their fellow-prisoners. And I being something hard of hearing and full of grief, none informing me how the Court took up my words, and therefore had no opportunity to declare what I intended when I said they were of our company. "

It was perfectly natural for her to have spoken of them as "of ourcompany, " not only from the fact that they had long been crowdedtogether in the same jails, but as they had accompanied each other inthe transferrence from one jail to another, from time to time. A fewdays before, a large party, of which she was one, had been broughtfrom Boston, spending the whole day together on the route. Sarah Good, John Procter and wife, Susanna Martin, Bridget Bishop, and AliceParker happen to be mentioned as belonging to it. Calef furtherstates:--

 "After her condemnation, the governor saw cause to grant a reprieve, which, when known (and some say immediately upon granting), the accusers renewed their dismal outcries against her; insomuch that the governor was by some Salem gentlemen prevailed with to recall the reprieve, and she was executed with the rest. 

 "The testimonials of her Christian behavior, both in the course of her life and at her death, and her extraordinary care in educating her children, and setting them a good example, under the hands of so many, are so numerous, that for brevity they are here omitted. "

The extraordinary conduct of "the Salem gentlemen, " in preventing theintended exercise of executive discretion and clemency on thisoccasion, is explained, it is probable, by the fact, stated by Neal inhis "History of New England, " that there was an organized associationof private individuals, a committee of vigilance, in Salem, during thecontinuance of the delusion, who had undertaken to ferret out andprosecute all suspected persons. He says that many were arrested andthrown into prison by their influence and interference. It is hardlyto be doubted, that the persons who busied themselves to prevent thereprieve of Rebecca Nurse acted under the authority and by thedirection of this self-constituted body of inquisitors. The agency ofsuch unauthorized and irresponsible combinations is always ofquestionable expediency. When acting in the same line with an excitedpopulace, they are extremely dangerous. 

There is no more disgraceful record in the judicial annals of thecountry, than that which relates the trial of this excellent woman. The wave of popular fury made a clear breach over the judgment-seat. The loud and malignant outcry of an infatuated mob, inside and outsideof the Court-house, instead of being yielded to, ought to have been, not only sternly rebuked, but visited with prompt and exemplarypunishment. The judges were not only overcome and intimidated from thefaithful discharge of their sacred duty by a clamoring crowd, but theyplayed into their hands. Hutchinson justly remarks, that their conductwas in violation of that rule to execute "law and justice in mercy, "which ought always to be written on their hearts. "In a capital case, the Court often refuses a verdict of 'Guilty;' but rarely, if ever, sends a jury out again upon one of 'Not guilty. '" The statement madeby the foreman of the jury, with the subsequent explanation of theprisoner, taken in connection with the ground on which thechief-justice sent the jury out again after rendering their verdict of"Not guilty, " made it the duty of the Court and the executive to giveto her the benefit of that verdict. 

At the trial of her mother, Sarah Nurse--aged twenty-eight years orthereabouts--offered this piece of testimony: that, "being in theCourt, this 29th of June, 1692, I saw Goodwife Bibber pull pins out ofher clothes, and held them between her fingers, and clasped her handsround her knee; and then she cried out, and said, Goody Nurse pinchedher. " In all these trials, Mercy Lewis was a principal witness andactor; yet we find, among the papers, testimony from the mostrespectable and reliable persons, that she was not to be trusted. There was also testimony which ought to have broken the force of thedepositions of Ann Putnam and her mother. Four days after theexamination and commitment of Rebecca Nurse, John Tarbell and SamuelNurse went to the house of Thomas Putnam to find out in what way theirmother had been made the object of such shocking accusations. Theywere men whose credibility was never brought in question. Theirdeclarations, on this occasion, were not disputed, and, if not true, might have been overthrown; for there were many witnesses of the factsthey stated. Tarbell swore as follows: "Upon discourse of many things, I asked whether the girl that was afflicted did first speak of GoodyNurse, before others mentioned her to her. They said she told them shesaw the apparition of a pale-faced woman that sat in her grandmother'sseat, but did not know her name. Then I replied and said, 'But who wasit that told her that it was Goody Nurse?' Mercy Lewis said it wasGoody Putnam that said it was Goody Nurse. Goody Putnam said that itwas Mercy Lewis that told her. Thus they turned it upon one another, saying, 'It was you, ' and 'It was you that told her. '" Samuel Nursetestified to the same. 

There was another piece of evidence, which, though brought againstRebecca Nurse, bears harder, as we read it now, upon Ann Putnam thanany one else, and makes it more difficult to palliate her conduct onthe supposition of partial insanity. It is, all along, one of theobscure problems of our subject to determine how far delusion may havebeen accompanied by fraud and imposture. Edward Putnam testified, that"Ann Putnam, Jr. , was bitten by Rebecca Nurse, as she said, about twoof the clock of the day" after Rebecca Nurse had been committed tojail, and while she was several miles distant, in Salem; and the saidNurse also struck said Ann Putnam with her spectral chain, leaving amark, "being in a kind of a round ring, and three streaks across thering: she had six blows with a chain in the space of half an hour; andshe had one remarkable one, with six streaks across her arm. " EdwardPutnam swears, "I saw the mark, both of bite and chains. " The Court, no doubt, were solemnly impressed by this amazing evidence; but it ishard to avoid the conclusion that Ann Putnam was guilty of elaboratefalsehood and a studied trick. 

In the trials at this session, one of the "afflicted children" criedout against the Rev. Samuel Willard, of the Old South Church, inBoston. "She was sent out of Court, and it was told about that she wasmistaken in the person. " There was surely evidence enough against thehonesty and credibility of the accusers to leave the judges withoutexcuse, and justly meriting perpetual condemnation for not paying heedto it. 

The case of Rebecca Nurse proves that a verdict could not have beenobtained against a person of her character charged with witchcraft inthis county, had not the most extraordinary efforts been made by theprosecuting officer, aided by the whole influence of the Court andprovincial authorities. The odium of the proceedings at the trials andat the executions cannot fairly be laid upon Salem, or the people ofthis vicinity. 

But nothing can extenuate the infamy that must for ever rest upon thenames of certain parties to the proceedings. Not to attempt here tomeasure the guilt of the accusing witnesses, it may be mentioned thatit was the deliberate conviction of the family of Rebecca Nurse, thatMr. Parris, more than all other persons, was responsible for herexecution; whether by his officious activity in driving on theprosecution, or in preventing her reprieve, cannot be known. Of theprominent part taken by Mr. Noyes in the cruel treatment of thiswoman, there is no room for doubt. The records of the First Church inSalem are darkened by the following entry:--

 "1692, July 3. --After sacrament, the elders propounded to the church, --and it was, by an unanimous vote, consented to, --that our sister Nurse, being a convicted witch by the Court, and condemned to die, should be excommunicated; which was accordingly done in the afternoon, she being present. "

The scene presented on this occasion must have been truly impressiveat the time, as it is shocking to us in the retrospect. The action ofthe church, at the close of the morning service, of course becameuniversally known; and the "great and spacious meeting-house" wasthronged by a crowd that filled every nook and corner of its floor, galleries, and windows. The sheriff and his subordinates brought inthe prisoner, manacled, and the chains clanking from her aged form. She was placed in the broad aisle. Mr. Higginson and Mr. Noyes--theelders, as the clergy were then called--were in the pulpit. The tworuling elders--who were lay officers--and the two deacons were intheir proper seats, directly below and in front of the pulpit. Mr. Noyes pronounced the dread sentence, which, for such a crime, was thenbelieved to be not merely an expulsion from the church on earth, butan exclusion from the church in heaven. It was meant to be understoodas an eternal doom. As it had been proved, in his estimation, beyond aquestion, that she had given her soul to the Devil, he delivered herover to the great adversary of God and man. 

From the dismal cell, which, for but a few days longer, was to holdher body, he proclaimed the transferrence of her soul to--

 "A dungeon horrible on all sides round, As one great furnace flamed; yet from those flames No light, but rather darkness visible; Regions of sorrow, doleful shades, where peace And rest can never dwell; hope never comes That comes to all; but torture without end, As far removed from God, and light of heaven, As from the centre thrice to the utmost pole. "

Language and imagery, exhausting the resources of the divine genius ofthe greatest of poets, fail to give expression to what was felt to bethe import of this fearful sentence. It sunk the recipient of it belowthe reach of human sympathy. She was regarded, by that blindedmultitude, with a horror that cast out pity, and was full of hate. Butin our view now, and, as we believe, in the view of God and angelsthen, she occupied an infinite height above her persecutors. Her mindwas serenely fixed upon higher scenes, and filled with a peace whichthe world could not take away, or its cruel wrongs disturb. She wentback to her prison walls, and then to the scaffold, with a pious andhumble faith which has not failed to be recorded among men, as it hasbeen rewarded where the wicked cease from troubling, and the weary areat rest. 

Calef, as already quoted, gives the impression produced by herdemeanor at her death. Hutchinson expresses in the following words thejudgment of history and the sense of all coming times:--

 "Mr. Noyes, the minister of Salem, a zealous prosecutor, excommunicated the poor old woman, and delivered her to Satan, to whom he supposed she had formally given herself up many years before; but her life and conversation had been such, that the remembrance thereof, in a short time after, wiped off all the reproach occasioned by the civil or ecclesiastical sentence against her. "

It is impossible to close the story of the lot assigned to this goodwoman by an inscrutable Providence, without again contemplating it ina condensed recapitulation. In her old age, experiencing a full shareof all the delicate infirmities which the instincts of humanityrequire to be treated with careful and reverent tenderness, she wasruthlessly snatched from the bosom of a loving family reared by herpious fidelity in all Christian graces, from the side of the devotedcompanion of her long life, from a home that was endeared by everygrateful association and comfort; immured in the most wretched andcrowded jails; kept loaded with irons and bound with cords for months;insulted and maligned at the preliminary examinations; outraged in herperson by rough and unfeeling handling and scrutiny; and in herrights, by the most flagrant and detestable judicial oppression, bywhich the benefit of a verdict, given in her favor, had been tornaway; carried to the meeting-house to receive the sentence ofexcommunication in a manner devised to harrow her most sacredsentiments; and finally carted through the streets by a route everyfoot of which must have been distressing to her infirm and enfeebledframe; made to ascend a rough and rocky path to the place ofexecution, and there consigned to the hangman. Surely, there hasseldom been a harder fate. 

Her body was probably thrown with the rest into a hole in the crevicesof the rock, and covered hastily and thinly over by the executioners. It has been the constant tradition of the family, that, in some way, it was recovered; and the spot is pointed out in the burial-placebelonging to the estate, where her ashes rest by the side of herhusband, and in the midst of her children. It is certain, that, atleast, one other body was thus exhumed, and taken to its own properplace of burial. From the known character of Francis Nurse and hissons and sons-in-law, we may be sure that what others could do theydid not suffer to remain undone. It is left to the imagination topresent the details of the sad and secret enterprise. In the darknessof midnight, they found and identified the body, and bore it tenderlyin their arms along the silent roads and by-ways, across fields andover fences, to the old home, where it was received by the assembledfamily, mourned over, and cared for; and, during that or the ensuingnight, deposited, with tears and prayers, in their own consecratedgrounds. Her descendants of successive generations owned andreverently guarded the spot. They own and guard it to-day. Theinteresting reminiscences connected with the early history of theNurse house have been alluded to. It has witnessed an extraordinaryvariety of the conditions of domestic vicissitude. Scenes risingbefore the mind in contemplative retrospection, while gazing upon it, present the extremest contrasts of human experience. On the evening ofthe 25th of October, 1678, Mary and Elizabeth Nurse were married. Suchan occurrence was undoubtedly the occasion of the highest joy andgladness in a happy household. The old mansion shone in light, andechoed voices of cheer. How altered its aspect! What darkness andsilence brooded over and within it, while those same daughters waited, watched, and listened, through the solemn hours of that night of woeand horror, for the coming of their father, husbands, and brothers, bearing to the home, from which she had been so cruelly torn, theremains of their slaughtered mother!

The subsequent history of the house presents a circumstance ofsingular interest in connection with our story. All the members ofthe three branches of the Putnam family, with the exception of Joseph, seem to have been carried away by the witchcraft delusion, in itsearly stages, and were more or less active in pushing on theprosecutions. We have seen how fierce was the maniac testimony of Mrs. Ann Putnam and her daughter against Rebecca Nurse. The lapse of time, by a Providence that wonderfully works its ends, has repaired thebreaches made by folly and wrong. The descendants of the numerousfamily of Mrs. Ann Putnam have disappeared from the scene: none ofthem bearing the name are in the village. The descendants of DeaconEdward Putnam have also scattered in emigration to other places. Nathaniel and John, the heads of the other two branches of the family, although involved in the witchcraft delusion, each signed papers infavor of Rebecca Nurse; their descendants, as well as those of Joseph, are still numerous in the village, hold their old position ofrespectability and influence, and many of them occupy the lands oftheir ancestors. Stephen, the grandson of Nathaniel, married Miriam, the grand-daughter of John. Their son Phinehas, in 1784, bought theNurse homestead from Benjamin Nurse, the great-grandson of Rebecca. Orin Putnam, the great-grandson of Phinehas, to whom the estatedescends, married in 1836 the daughter of Allen Nurse, a directdescendant of Rebecca, and placed her at the head of her old ancestralhomestead. The children of that marriage, with their father andgrandfather, constitute the family that dwell in and own thevenerable mansion. This singular restoration, suggesting such pleasingsentiments, adds another to the remarkable elements of interestbelonging to the history of the Townsend-Bishop House. 

The descendants of Francis and Rebecca Nurse are numerous, and havehonorably perpetuated the name. Among them may be mentioned the Rev. Peter Nurse, a graduate of Harvard College in 1802, for some yearslibrarian of that institution, an excellent scholar, and longuniversally respected as a clergyman; and Amos Nurse, a graduate ofthe same college in 1812, --an eminent physician connected with themedical faculty of Bowdoin College, a man of distinguished talent andinfluence in public affairs, and senator in Congress from the State ofMaine. 

The Court met again on the 5th of August, and tried George Burroughs;John Procter and Elizabeth, his wife; George Jacobs, Sr. ; JohnWillard; and Martha Carrier. They were all condemned, and, with theexception of Elizabeth Procter, executed on the 19th of the samemonth. 

Hutchinson describes the trial of Burroughs. After speaking of theevidence of the "afflicted persons" and the confessing witches, hementions other circumstances which were thought to corroborate it:"One was, that, being a little man, he had performed feats beyond thestrength of a giant; viz. , had held out a gun of seven feet barrelwith one hand, and had carried a barrel full of cider from a canoe tothe shore. " Burroughs said that an Indian present at the time did thesame. Instantly, the accusers said it was "the black man, or theDevil, who, " they swore, "looks like an Indian. " Another piece ofevidence was, that he went from one place to another, on a certainoccasion, in a shorter time than was possible had not the Devil helpedhim. He said, in answer, that another man accompanied him. Their replyto this was, that it was the Devil, using the appearance of anotherman. So whatever he said was turned against him. Hutchinson says, "Upon the whole, he was confounded, and used many twistings andturnings, which, I think, we cannot wonder at. " This fair andjudicious writer, like Brattle, appears in the foregoing remark tohave adopted the common scandal, put in circulation by partiesinterested to disparage Mr. Burroughs. The papers in this case, thathave come down to us, are more numerous than in reference to manyothers among the sufferers; and they do not bear such an impression. Mr. Burroughs was astounded at the monstrous folly and falsehood withwhich he was surrounded. He was a man without guile, and incapable ofappreciating such wickedness. He tried, in simplicity andingenuousness, to explain what was brought against him; and this, probably, was all the "twisting and turning" he exhibited. 

Hutchinson had the benefit of consulting all the papers belonging tothis and other trials; but neither he nor Calef seems to have noticedone remarkable fact: many of the depositions, how many we cannottell, were procured after the trials were over, and surreptitiouslyfoisted in among the papers to bolster up the proceedings. We find, for instance, the following deposition:--

 "THOMAS GREENSLITT, aged about forty years, being deposed, testifieth that, about the first breaking-out of this last Indian war, being at the house of Captain Joshua Scotto at Black Point, he saw Mr. George Burrows, who was lately executed at Salem, lift a gun of six-foot barrel or thereabouts, putting the forefinger of his right hand into the muzzle of said gun, and that he held it out at arms' end, only with that finger: and further this deponent testifieth, that, at the same time, he saw the said Burrows take up a full barrel of molasses with but two of the fingers of one of his hands in the bung, and carry it from the stage head to the door at the end of the stage, without letting it down; and that Lieutenant Richard Hunniwell and John Greenslitt were then present, and some others that are dead. Sept. 15, '92. "

Not only the date to this deposition, but its express language, provesthat it could not have been used at the trial. There is another, tothe same effect and of the same date, that is, nearly a month afterBurroughs was thrown into his grave. There are others of the samekind. This stamps the management of the prosecutions, and of thoseconcerned in the charge of the papers, with an irregularity of thegrossest kind, which partakes strongly of the character of fraud andfalsehood. 

When it was found that there was beginning to grow up a want ofconfidence in "spectre evidence" and the testimony of the afflictedchildren, those concerned in the prosecutions became alarmed lest are-action of public sentiment might take place. The persons who hadbrought Mr. Burroughs to his death concluded that their best escapefrom public indignation was to accumulate evidence against him afterhe was in his grave, particularly on the point of his superhumanstrength; and they got up these depositions, and caused them to be putamong the papers on file. Great stress was laid, by those who wereinterested in damaging his character and suppressing sympathy in hisfate, upon this particular proof of his having been in confederacywith the Devil. Increase Mather said, that, in his judgment, it wasconclusive evidence that he "had the Devil to be his familiar, " andthat, had he been on the jury, he could not, on this account, haveconcurred in a verdict of acquittal; and Cotton Mather, feeling theimportance of making the most of Mr. Burroughs's extraordinarystrength, gives way to his tendency to indulge in the marvellous, asfollows:--

 "God had been pleased so to leave this George Burroughs, that he had ensnared himself by several instances which he had formerly given of preternatural strength, and which were now produced against him. He was a very puny man, yet he had often done things beyond the strength of a giant. A gun of about seven-foot barrel, and so heavy that strong men could not steadily hold it out with both hands, --there were several testimonies given in by persons of credit and honor, that he made nothing of taking up such a gun behind the lock with but one hand, and holding it out, like a pistol, at arms' end. Yea, there were two testimonies, that George Burroughs, with only putting the forefinger of his right hand into the muzzle of a heavy gun, a fowling-piece of about six or seven foot barrel, did lift up the gun, and hold it out at arms' end, --a gun which the deponents thought strong men could not with both hands lift up, and hold at the butt end, as is usual. "

It is further observable, in reference to the foregoing depositionfrom Greenslitt, that it was given six days after the condemnation ofhis mother, Ann Pudeator, and a week before her execution. CottonMather says that he "was overpersuaded by others to be out of the wayupon George Burroughs's trial, " six weeks before. He did not fail, however, to come to Salem to be with his mother at her trial and untilher death, and being here was compelled to give his deposition. Hismother's life was at the mercy of the prosecutors; and he was tempted, in the vain hope of conciliating that mercy, to gratify them by makingthe statement about Burroughs a month after his execution, and whom itcould not then harm. What he said was probably no more than the truth. It has been found that the power of the human muscles can becultivated to a surprising extent; and the feats ascribed toBurroughs, without making much allowance for a natural degree ofexaggeration, have been fully equalled in our day. 

Calef gives the following account of his execution:--

 "Mr. Burroughs was carried in a cart with the others, through the streets of Salem, to execution. When he was upon the ladder, he made a speech for the clearing of his innocency, with such solemn and serious expressions as were to the admiration of all present. His prayer (which he concluded by repeating the Lord's Prayer) was so well worded, and uttered with such composedness and such (at least seeming) fervency of spirit, as was very affecting, and drew tears from many, so that it seemed to some that the spectators would hinder the execution. The accusers said the black man stood and dictated to him. As soon as he was turned off, Mr. Cotton Mather, being mounted upon a horse, addressed himself to the people, partly to declare that he (Mr. Burroughs) was no ordained minister, and partly to possess the people of his guilt, saying that the Devil often had been transformed into an angel of light; and this somewhat appeased the people, and the executions went on. When he was cut down, he was dragged by a halter to a hole, or grave, between the rocks, about two feet deep; his shirt and breeches being pulled off, and an old pair of trousers of one executed put on his lower parts: he was so put in, together with Willard and Carrier, that one of his hands, and his chin, and a foot of one of them, was left uncovered. "

Cotton Mather, not satisfied with this display of animosity, at amoment when every human heart, however imbittered by prejudice, ishushed for the time in solemn silence, attempts, in an accountafterwards given of Mr. Burroughs's trial, to blacken his character byan elaborate dressing-up of the absurd stories told by the accusers, and a perverse misrepresentation of the demeanor of the accused. Herelates with apparent glee what was regarded as a wonderfulachievement of adroitness on the part of Chief-justice Stoughton intrapping Mr. Burroughs, and putting the laugh upon him in Court. 

 "It cost the Court a wonderful deal of trouble to hear the testimonies of the sufferers; for, when they were going to give in their depositions, they would for a long while be taken with fits, that made them quite uncapable of saying any thing. The chief judge asked the prisoner, who he thought hindered these witnesses from giving their testimonies; and he answered, he supposed it was the Devil. The honorable person then replied, 'How comes the Devil so loath to have any testimony borne against you?' Which cast him into very great confusion. "

From what fell from him, at the preliminary examination, it is evidentthat it did not occur to him as a possibility that human nature couldbe capable of the guilt of such a wilful fabrication and imposture onthe part of the "afflicted children. " He beheld their sufferings, andhe knew his own innocence. He felt, whatever his theological creedmight have been, that a Devil was required to explain the mystery. Theapparent sufferings of the accusing witnesses convinced Court, jury, and all, of the guilt of the accused. The logic of the chief-justicewas perfectly absurd. For, if the Devil caused the sufferings, he wasan adverse party to the prisoner. This, however, overthrows the wholetheory of the prosecution, which was that the prisoner and the Devilwere in league with each other. But the judge, jury, and people, allequally blinded and stupefied by the delusion, did not see it; andthey chuckled over the alleged confusion of the prisoner. Allthoughtful persons will concur in Mr. Burroughs's opinion, that, ifever a diabolical power had possession of human beings, it was in thecase of the wretched creatures who enacted the part of the accusinggirls in the witchcraft proceedings. In his account of the trial, Mather makes statements which show that he was privy to the fact, thattestimony, subsequently taken, was lodged with the evidence belongingto the case. The documents prove that it was done to an extent beyondwhat he acknowledges. 

Considering that none dared to show the least sympathy with thepersons on trial, that they had none to counsel or stand by them, thatthe public passions were incensed against them as against no otherpersons ever charged with crime, --it being vastly more flagrant thanany other crime, a rebellion against heaven and earth, God and man; adeliberate selling of the soul to the Arch-enemy of souls for the ruinof all other souls, --in view of all these things, it is trulyastonishing, that, by the documents themselves, proceeding, as inalmost all cases they do, from hostile and imbittered sources, we arecompelled to the conviction, that, in their imprisonments, trials, anddeaths, the victims of this savage delusion manifested--in most caseseminently, and in all substantially--the marks, not only of innocent, but of elevated and heroic minds. A review of what can be gleaned inreference to Mr. Burroughs at Casco Bay and Salem Village, and aconsiderate survey and scrutiny of all that has reached us from theday of his arrest to the moment of his death, have left a decidedimpression, that he was an able, intelligent, true-minded man;ingenuous, sincere, humble in his spirit; faithful and devoted as aminister; and active, generous, and disinterested as a citizen. Hisdescendants, under his own name and the names of Newman, Fowle, Holbrook, Fox, Thomas, and others, have been numerous and respectable. The late Isaiah Thomas, LL. D. , was one of them. 

From the account given of John Procter, in the First Part, it isapparent that he was a person of decided character, and, althoughimpulsive and liable to be imprudent, of a manly spirit, honest, earnest, and bold in word and deed. He saw through the whole thing, and was convinced that it was the result of a conspiracy, deliberateand criminal, on the part of the accusers. He gave free utterance tohis indignation at their conduct, and it cost him his life. 

A few days before his trial, he made his will. There is no referencein it to his particular situation. His signature to the document isaccurately represented among the autographs given in this work. It waswritten while the manacles were on him. Notwithstanding the danger towhich any one was exposed who expressed sympathy for convicted oraccused persons, or doubt of their guilt, a large number had themanliness to try to save this worthy and honest citizen. John Wise, one of the ministers of Ipswich, heads the list of petitioners fromthat place. The document is in his handwriting. Thirty-one othersjoined in the act, many of them among the most respectable citizens ofthat town. Mr. Wise was a learned, able, and enlightened man. He had afree spirit, and was perhaps the only minister in the neighborhood orcountry, who was discerning enough to see the erroneousness of theproceedings from the beginning. The petition is as follows:--

 "_The Humble and Sincere Declaration of us, Subscribers, Inhabitants in Ipswich, on the Behalf of our Neighbors, John Procter and his Wife, now in Trouble and under Suspicion of Witchcraft. _

 "TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF ASSISTANTS NOW SITTING IN BOSTON. 

 "_Honored and Right Worshipful_, --The aforesaid John Procter may have great reason to justify the Divine Sovereignty of God under these severe remarks of Providence upon his peace and honor, under a due reflection upon his life past; and so the best of us have reason to adore the great pity and indulgence of God's providence, that we are not exposed to the utmost shame that the Devil can invent, under the permissions of sovereignty, though not for that sin forenamed, yet for our many transgressions. For we do at present suppose, that it may be a method within the severer but just transactions of the infinite majesty of God, that he sometimes may permit Sathan to personate, dissemble, and thereby abuse innocents and such as do, in the fear of God, defy the Devil and all his works. The great rage he is permitted to attempt holy Job with; the abuse he does the famous Samuel in disquieting his silent dust, by shadowing his venerable person in answer to the charms of witchcraft; and other instances from good hands, --may be arguments. Besides the unsearchable footsteps of God's judgments, that are brought to light every morning, that astonish our weaker reasons; to teach us adoration, trembling, dependence, &c. But we must not trouble Your Honors by being tedious. Therefore, being smitten with the notice of what hath happened, we reckon it within the duties of our charity, that teacheth us to do as we would be done by, to offer thus much for the clearing of our neighbors' innocency; viz. , that we never had the least knowledge of such a nefandous wickedness in our said neighbors, since they have been within our acquaintance. Neither do we remember any such thoughts in us concerning them, or any action by them or either of them, directly tending that way, no more than might be in the lives of any other persons of the clearest reputation as to any such evils. What God may have left them to, we cannot go into God's pavilion clothed with clouds of darkness round about; but, as to what we have ever seen or heard of them, upon our consciences we judge them innocent of the crime objected. His breeding hath been amongst us, and was of religious parents in our place, and, by reason of relations and properties within our town, hath had constant intercourse with us. We speak upon our personal acquaintance and observation; and so leave our neighbors, and this our testimony on their behalf, to the wise thoughts of Your Honors. 

 JNO. WISE. NATHANILL PERKINS. BENJAMIN MARSHALL. WILLIAM STORY Senr. THOMAS LOVKINE. JOHN ANDREWS Jur. REINALLD FOSTER. WILLIAM COGSWELL. WILLIAM BUTLER. THOS. CHOTE. THOMAS VARNY. WILLIAM ANDREWS. JOHN BURNUM Sr. JOHN FELLOWS. JOHN ANDREWS. WILLIAM THOMSONN. WM. COGSWELL Jur. JOHN CHOTE Ser. THO. LOW Senr. JONATHAN COGSWELL. JOSEPH PROCTER. ISAAC FOSTER. JOHN COGSWELL Ju. SAMUEL GIDDING. JOHN BURNUM junr. JOHN COGSWELL. JOSEPH EVLETH. WILLIAM GOODHEW. THOMAS ANDREWS. JAMES WHITE. ISAAC PERKINS. JOSEPH ANDREWS. "

I have given the names of the men who signed this paper, as copiedfrom the original. It is due to their memory; and their descendantsmay well be gratified by the testimony thus borne to their courage andjustice. 

Their neighbors living near the bounds of the village presented thefollowing paper, in the handwriting of Felton, the first signer. Fromthe appearance of the document, it seems that a portion of it, probably containing an equal number of names, has been cut out byscissors. 

 "We whose names are underwritten, having several years known John Procter and his wife, do testify that we never heard or understood that they were ever suspected to be guilty of the crime now charged upon them; and several of us, being their near neighbors, do testify, that, to our apprehension, they lived Christian-like in their family, and were ever ready to help such as stood in need of their help. 

 "NATHANIEL FELTON, Sr. , and MARY his wife. SAMUEL MARSH, and PRISCILLA his wife. JAMES HOULTON, and RUTH his wife. JOHN FELTON. NATHANIEL FELTON, Jr. SAMUEL FRAYLL, and AN his wife. ZACHARIAH MARSH, and MARY his wife. SAMUEL ENDECOTT, and HANAH his wife. SAMUEL STONE. GEORGE LOCKER. SAMUEL GASKIL, and PROVIDED his wife. GEORGE SMITH. EDWARD GASKIL. "

In addition to this testimony in their favor, evidence was offered, attheir trial, that one of the accusing witnesses had denied, out ofCourt, what she had sworn to in Court; and declared that she must, atthe time, have been "out of her head, " and that she had never intendedto accuse them. It was further proved, that another of the accusingwitnesses acknowledged that she had sworn falsely, and tried toexplain away her testimony in Court, acknowledging that what the girlssaid was "for sport. They must have some sport. " But neither thetestimony in their favor from those who had known them through life, nor the palpable and decisive manner in which the evidence againstthem had been impeached and exposed, could open the eyes of theinfatuated Court and jury. 

After his conviction, he requested, in vain, time enough to preparehimself for death, and make the necessary arrangements of his businessand for the welfare of his family; and the statement has come down tous, that Mr. Noyes refused to pray with him, unless he would confesshimself guilty. The following letter, addressed by him to theministers named, in behalf of himself and fellow-prisoners, gives atruly shocking account of the outrages connected with theprosecutions. It illustrates the courage of the writer in exposingthem, and is a sensible and manly appeal and remonstrance. There isground for supposing that the ministers addressed were known not to beentirely carried away by the delusion. The fact that Mr. Mather--meaning, of course, Increase Mather--is the first named, corroborates other evidence that he was beginning to entertain doubtsabout the propriety of the proceedings. Of the Rev. James Allen, muchhas been said in connection with the Townsend-Bishop farm. He had beena clergyman in England, and was silenced by the Act of Uniformity, in1662. He came to New England; and, after officiating as an assistantto the Rev. Mr. Davenport, in the First Church at Boston, for sixyears, was ordained as its preacher in 1668. He was of independentfortune, and subsequently took a leading part with those opposed tothe party that had favored the witchcraft prosecutions. He must haveknown Rebecca Nurse quite intimately, and much of the influence usedin her favor, and which almost saved her, may be attributed to him;there was a particular intimacy between him and Increase Mather, andtogether they held Cotton Mather somewhat in check, occasionally atleast. The Rev. Joshua Moody had been settled in the ministry atPortsmouth, New Hampshire. In the maintenance of the principles ofreligious liberty he suffered a long imprisonment, and was afterwardsexiled by arbitrary power. He was then invited to the First Church inBoston, where he preached from 1684 to 1693, when he returned toPortsmouth. He died in 1697. By his active exertions, Mr. And Mrs. English were enabled to escape from the jail at Boston. The Rev. Samuel Willard, pastor of the Old South Church in Boston, was one ofthe most revered and beloved ministers in the country. Hispublications were numerous, learned, and valuable; consisting ofdiscourses, tracts, and volumes. His "Body of Divinity" is anelaborate and systematic work, comprising two hundred and fiftylectures on the Assembly's Catechism. That Procter was not in error insupposing Mr. Willard open to reason on the subject is demonstrated bythe fact, that the "afflicted girls" were beginning to cry out againstthis eminent divine. The Rev. John Bailey was one of the ejectedministers who had here sought refuge from oppression in themother-country. He was a distinguished person, associated with Mr. Allen and Mr. Moody in the ministry of the First Church at Boston. Cotton Mather made him the subject of the strongest eulogium in his"Magnalia. " Procter addressed his letter to these persons because hebelieved them to be superior in wisdom and candid in spirit. It cannotbe doubted that the good men did what they could in his behalf, but invain. 

 "SALEM PRISON, July 23, 1692. 

 "_Mr. Mather, Mr. Allen, Mr. Moody, Mr. Willard, and Mr. Bailey. _

 "REVEREND GENTLEMEN, --The innocency of our case, with the enmity of our accusers and our judges and jury, whom nothing but our innocent blood will serve, having condemned us already before our trials, being so much incensed and enraged against us by the Devil, makes us bold to beg and implore your favorable assistance of this our humble petition to His Excellency, that if it be possible our innocent blood may be spared, which undoubtedly otherwise will be shed, if the Lord doth not mercifully step in; the magistrates, ministers, juries, and all the people in general, being so much enraged and incensed against us by the delusion of the Devil, which we can term no other, by reason we know, in our own consciences, we are all innocent persons. Here are five persons who have lately confessed themselves to be witches, and do accuse some of us of being along with them at a sacrament, since we were committed into close prison, which we know to be lies. Two of the five are (Carrier's sons) young men, who would not confess any thing till they tied them neck and heels, till the blood was ready to come out of their noses; and it is credibly believed and reported this was the occasion of making them confess what they never did, by reason they said one had been a witch a month, and another five weeks, and that their mother made them so, who has been confined here this nine weeks. My son, William Procter, when he was examined, because he would not confess that he was guilty, when he was innocent, they tied him neck and heels till the blood gushed out at his nose, and would have kept him so twenty-four hours, if one, more merciful than the rest, had not taken pity on him, and caused him to be unbound. 

 "These actions are very like the Popish cruelties. They have already undone us in our estates, and that will not serve their turns without our innocent blood. If it cannot be granted that we can have our trials at Boston, we humbly beg that you would endeavor to have these magistrates changed, and others in their room; begging also and beseeching you, that you would be pleased to be here, if not all, some of you, at our trials, hoping thereby you may be the means of saving the shedding of our innocent blood. Desiring your prayers to the Lord in our behalf, we rest, your poor afflicted servants, "JOHN PROCTER [and others]. "

The bitterness of the prosecutors against Procter was so vehement, that they not only arrested, and tried to destroy, his wife and allhis family above the age of infancy, in Salem, but all her relativesin Lynn, many of whom were thrown into prison. The helpless childrenwere left destitute, and the house swept of its provisions by thesheriff. Procter's wife gave birth to a child, about a fortnight afterhis execution. This indicates to what alone she owed her life. 

John Procter had spoken so boldly against the proceedings, and all whohad part in them, that it was felt to be necessary to put him out ofthe way. He had denounced the entire company of the accusers, andtheir revenge demanded his sacrifice. They brought the whole power oftheir cunning and audacious arts to bear against him, and pursued himto the death with violence and rage. The manly and noble deportmentexhibited in his dying hour seems to have made a deep impression onthe minds of some, and gave an effectual blow to the delusion. Thedescendants of John Procter have always understood that his remainswere recovered from the spot where the hangman deposited them, andplaced in his own grounds, where they rest to-day. 

[Illustration: [signatures]]

[Illustration: [signatures]]

No account has come to us of the deportment of George Jacobs, Sr. , athis execution. As he was remarkable in life for the firmness of hismind, so he probably was in death. He had made his will before thedelusion arose. It is dated Jan. 29, 1692; and shows that he, likeProcter, had a considerable estate. Bartholomew Gedney is one ofthe attesting witnesses, and probably wrote the document. After hisconviction, on the 12th of August, he caused another to be written, which, in its provisions, reflects light upon the state of mindproduced by the condition in which he found himself. In his infirm oldage, he had been condemned to die for a crime of which he knew himselfinnocent, and which there is some reason to believe he did not thinkany one capable of committing. He regarded the whole thing as a wickedconspiracy and absurd fabrication. He had to end his long life upon ascaffold in a week from that day. His house was desolated, and hisproperty sequestered. His only son, charged with the same crime, hadeluded the sheriff, --leaving his family, in the hurry of his flight, unprovided for--and was an exile in foreign lands. The crazy wife ofthat son was in prison and in chains, waiting trial on the samecharge; her little children, including an unweaned infant, left in adeserted and destitute condition in the woods. The older children werescattered, he knew not where, while one of them had completed thebitterness of his lot by becoming a confessor, upon being arrestedwith her mother as a witch. This grand-daughter, Margaret, overwhelmedwith fright and horror, bewildered by the statements of the accusers, and controlled probably by the arguments and arbitrary methods ofaddress employed by her minister, Mr. Noyes, --whose peculiar functionin these proceedings seems to have been to drive persons accused tomake confession--had been betrayed into that position, and became aconfessor, and accuser of others. Under these circumstances, the oldman made a will, giving to his son George his estates, and securingthe succession of them to his male descendants. But, in the meanwhile, without his then knowing it, Margaret had recalled herconfession, as appears from the following documents, which tell theirown story:--

 "_The Humble Declaration of Margaret Jacobs unto the Honored Court now sitting at Salem showeth_, that, whereas your poor and humble declarant, being closely confined here in Salem jail for the crime of witchcraft, --which crime, thanks be to the Lord! I am altogether ignorant of, as will appear at the great day of judgment, --may it please the honored Court, I was cried out upon by some of the possessed persons as afflicting them; whereupon I was brought to my examination; which persons at the sight of me fell down, which did very much startle and affright me. The Lord above knows I knew nothing in the least measure how or who afflicted them. They told me, without doubt I did, or else they would not fall down at me; they told me, if I would not confess, I should be put down into the dungeon, and would be hanged, but, if I would confess, I should have my life: the which did so affright me, with my own vile, wicked heart, to save my life, made me make the like confession I did, which confession, may it please the honored Court, is altogether false and untrue. The very first night after I had made confession, I was in such horror of conscience that I could not sleep, for fear the Devil should carry me away for telling such horrid lies. I was, may it please the honored Court, sworn to my confession, as I understand since; but then, at that time, was ignorant of it, not knowing what an oath did mean. The Lord, I hope, in whom I trust, out of the abundance of his mercy, will forgive me my false forswearing myself. What I said was altogether false against my grandfather and Mr. Burroughs, which I did to save my life, and to have my liberty: but the Lord, charging it to my conscience, made me in so much horror, that I could not contain myself before I had denied my confession, which I did, though I saw nothing but death before me; choosing rather death with a quiet conscience, than to live in such horror, which I could not suffer. Where, upon my denying my confession, I was committed to close prison, where I have enjoyed more felicity in spirit, a thousand times, than I did before in my enlargement. And now, may it please Your Honors, your declarant having in part given Your Honors a description of my condition, do leave it to Your Honors' pious and judicious discretions to take pity and compassion on my young and tender years, to act and do with me as the Lord above and Your Honors shall see good, having no friend but the Lord to plead my cause for me; not being guilty, in the least measure, of the crime of witchcraft, nor any other sin that deserves death from man. And your poor and humble declarant shall for ever pray, as she is bound in duty, for Your Honors' happiness in this life, and eternal felicity in the world to come. So prays Your Honors' declarant, MARGARET JACOBS. "

The following letter was written by this same young person to herfather. Let it be observed that her grandfather had been executed theday before, partly upon her false testimony. 

 "_From the Dungeon in Salem Prison. _

 "AUGUST 20, 1692. 

 "HONORED FATHER, --After my humble duty remembered to you, hoping in the Lord of your good health, as, blessed be God! I enjoy, though in abundance of affliction, being close confined here in a loathsome dungeon: the Lord look down in mercy upon me, not knowing how soon I shall be put to death, by means of the afflicted persons; my grandfather having suffered already, and all his estate seized for the king. The reason of my confinement is this: I having, through the magistrates' threatenings, and my own vile and wretched heart, confessed several things contrary to my conscience and knowledge, though to the wounding of my own soul; (the Lord pardon me for it!) but, oh! the terrors of a wounded conscience who can bear? But, blessed be the Lord! he would not let me go on in my sins, but in mercy, I hope, to my soul, would not suffer me to keep it any longer: but I was forced to confess the truth of all before the magistrates, who would not believe me; but it is their pleasure to put me in here, and God knows how soon I shall be put to death. Dear father, let me beg your prayers to the Lord on my behalf, and send us a joyful and happy meeting in heaven. My mother, poor woman, is very crazy, and remembers her kind love to you, and to uncle; viz. , D. A. So, leaving you to the protection of the Lord, I rest, your dutiful daughter, MARGARET JACOBS. "

A temporary illness led to the postponement of her trial; and, beforethe next sitting of the Court, the delusion had passed away. 

The "uncle D. A. , " referred to, was Daniel Andrew, their nearestneighbor, who had escaped at the same time with her father. She callshim "uncle. " He was, it is probable, a brother of John Andrew who hadmarried Ann Jacobs, sister of her father. Words of relationship werethen used with a wide sense. 

Margaret read the recantation of her confession before the Court, andwas, as she says, forthwith ordered by them into a dungeon. Sheobtained permission to visit Mr. Burroughs the day before hisexecution, acknowledged that she had belied him, and implored hisforgiveness. He freely forgave, and prayed with her and for her. It isprobable, that, at the same time, she obtained an interview with hergrandfather for the same purpose. At any rate, the old man heard ofher heroic conduct, and forthwith crowded into the space between twoparagraphs in his will, in small letters closely written (the jailerprobably being the amanuensis), a clause giving a legacy of "tenpounds to be paid in silver" to his grand-daughter, Margaret Jacobs. There is the usual declaration, that it "was inserted before sealingand signing. " This will having been made after conviction and sentenceto death, and having but two witnesses, one besides the jailer, wasnot allowed in Probate, but remains among the files of that Court. Asa link in the foregoing story, it is an interesting relic. The legacyclause, although not operative, was no doubt of inexpressible value tothe feelings of Margaret: and the circumstance seems to have touchedthe heart even of the General Court, nearly twenty years afterwards;for they took pains specifically to provide to have the same sum paidto Margaret, out of the Province treasury. 

She was not tried at the time appointed, in consequence, it is stated, of "an imposthume in the head, " and finally escaped the fate to whichshe chose to consign herself, rather than remain under a violatedconscience. In judging of her, we cannot fail to make allowance forher "young and tender years, " and to sympathize in the sufferingsthrough which she passed. In making confession, and in accusingothers, she had done that which filled her heart with horror, in theretrospect, so long as she lived. In recanting it, and giving her bodyto the dungeon, and offering her life at the scaffold, she had securedthe forgiveness of Mr. Burroughs and her aged grandfather, anddeserves our forgiveness and admiration. Every human heart mustrejoice that this young girl was saved. She lived to be a worthymatron and the founder of a numerous and respectable family. 

George Jacobs, Sr. , is the only one, among the victims of thewitchcraft prosecutions, the precise spot of whose burial isabsolutely ascertained. 

[Illustration: THE JACOBS HOUSE. ]

The tradition has descended through the family, that the body, afterhaving been obtained at the place of execution, was strapped by ayoung grandson on the back of a horse, brought home to the farm, andburied beneath the shade of his own trees. Two sunken and weather-wornstones marked the spot. There the remains rested until 1864, when theywere exhumed. They were enclosed again, and reverently redeposited inthe same place. The skull was in a state of considerable preservation. An examination of the jawbones showed that he was a very old man atthe time of his death, and had previously lost all his teeth. Thelength of some parts of the skeleton showed that he was a very tallman. These circumstances corresponded with the evidence, which wasthat he was tall of stature; so infirm as to walk with two staffs;with long, flowing white hair. The only article found, except thebones, was a metallic pin, which might have been used as a breastpin, or to hold together his aged locks. It is an observable fact, that herests in his own ground still. He had lived for a great length of timeon that spot; and it remains in his family and in his name to thisday, having come down by direct descent. It is a beautiful locality:the land descends with a gradual and smooth declivity to the bank ofthe river. It is not much more than a mile from the city of Salem, andin full view from the main road. 

John Willard appears to have been an honest and amiable person, anindustrious farmer, having a comfortable estate, with a wife and threeyoung children. He was a grandson of Old Bray Wilkins; whether byblood or marriage, I have not been able to ascertain. The indicationsare that he married a daughter of Thomas or Henry Wilkins, mostprobably the former, with both of whom he was a joint possessor oflands. He came from Groton; and it is for local antiquaries todiscover whether he was a relative of the Rev. Samuel Willard ofBoston. If so, the fact would shed much light upon our story. Thereis but one piece of evidence among the papers relating to his trialthat deserves particular notice. It shows the horrid character of thecharges made by the girls against prisoners at the bar, from theirnature incapable of being refuted and which the prisoners knew to befalse, but the Court, jury, and crowd implicitly believed. It alsoillustrates the completeness of the machinery got up by the "accusinggirls" to give effect to their evidence. In addition to the evilgossip that could be scoured from all the country round, and tospectres of witches and ghosts of the dead, they brought into thescene angels and divine beings, and testified to what they were toldby them. "The shining man, " or the white man, was meant, in thefollowing deposition, to be a spirit of this description:--

 "THE TESTIMONY OF SUSANNA SHELDON, aged eighteen years or thereabouts. --Testifieth and saith, that, the day of the date hereof (9th of May, 1692), I saw at Nathaniel Ingersoll's house the apparitions of these four persons, --William Shaw's first wife, the Widow Cook, Goodman Jones and his child; and among these came the apparition of John Willard, to whom these four said, 'You have murdered us. ' These four having said thus to Willard, they turned as red as blood. And, turning about to look at me, they turned as pale as death. These four desired me to tell Mr. Hathorne. Willard, hearing them, pulled out a knife, saying, if I did, he would cut my throat. "

The deponent goes on to say, that these several apparitions camebefore her on another occasion, and the same language and actions tookplace, and adds:--

 "There did appear to me a shining man, who said I should go and tell what I had heard and seen to Mr. Hathorne. This Willard, being there present, told me, if I did, he would cut my throat. At this time and place, this shining man told me, that if I did go to tell this to Mr. Hathorne, that I should be well, going and coming, but I should be afflicted there. Then said I to the shining man, 'Hunt Willard away, and I would believe what he said, that he might not choke me. ' With that the shining man held up his hand, and Willard vanished away. About two hours after, the same appeared to me again, and the said Willard with them; and I asked them where their wounds were, and they said there would come an angel from heaven, and would show them. And forthwith the angel came. I asked what the man's name was that appeared to me last, and the angel told his name was Southwick. And the angel lifted up his winding-sheet, and out of his left side he pulled a pitchfork tine, and put it in again, and likewise he opened all the winding-sheets, and showed all their wounds. And the white man told me to tell Mr. Hathorne of it, and I told him to hunt Willard away, and I would; and he held up his hand, and he vanished away. "

In the same deposition, this girl testifies that "she saw this Willardsuckle the apparitions of two black pigs on his breasts;" that Willardtold her he had been a witch twenty years; that she saw Willard andother wizards kneel in prayer "to the black man with a long-crownedhat, and then they vanished away. "

Such was the kind of testimony which the Court received withawe-struck and bewildered credulity, and which took away the lives ofvaluable and blameless men. All we know of the manner of Willard'sdeath is a passage from Brattle, who states that a deep impression wasproduced by the admirable deportment of the sufferers during the awfulscenes before and at their executions; giving every evidence ofconscious innocence and a Christian character and faith, on the partespecially of "Procter and Willard, whose whole management ofthemselves from the jail to the gallows, and whilst at the gallows, was very affecting, and melting to the hearts of some considerablespectators whom I could mention to you: but they are executed, and soI leave them. "

On the 9th of September, the Court met again; and _Martha Corey_, _Mary Easty_, _Alice Parker_, _Ann Pudeator_, Dorcas Hoar, and MaryBradbury were tried and condemned; and, on the 17th, _Margaret Scott_, _Wilmot Reed_, _Samuel Wardwell_, _Mary Parker_, Abigail Faulkner, Rebecca Eames, Mary Lacy, Ann Foster, and Abigail Hobbs received thesame sentence. Those in Italics were executed Sept. 22, 1692. Of thecircumstances in relation to them, in reference to their death and atthe time of their execution, but little information has reached us. The following extract from Mr. Parris's church-records presents astriking picture:--

 "11 September, Lord's Day. --Sister Martha Corey--taken into the church 27 April, 1690--was, after examination upon suspicion of witchcraft, 27 March, 1692, committed to prison for that fact, and was condemned to the gallows for the same yesterday; and was this day in public, by a general consent, voted to be excommunicated out of the church, and Lieutenant Nathaniel Putnam and the two deacons chosen to signify to her, with the pastor, the mind of the church herein. Accordingly, this 14 September, 1692, the three aforesaid brethren went with the pastor to her in Salem Prison; whom we found very obdurate, justifying herself, and condemning all that had done any thing to her just discovery or condemnation. Whereupon, after a little discourse (for her imperiousness would not suffer much), and after prayer, --which she was willing to decline, --the dreadful sentence of excommunication was pronounced against her. "

Calef informs us, that "Martha Corey, protesting her innocency, concluded her life with an eminent prayer upon the ladder. "

Nothing has reached us particularly relating to the manner of death ofAlice or Mary Parker, Ann Pudeator, Margaret Scott, or Wilmot Reed. They all asserted their innocence; and their deportment gave no groundfor any unfavorable comment by their persecutors, who were on thewatch to turn every act, word, or look of the sufferers to theirdisparagement. Wilmot Reed probably adhered to the unresistingdemeanor which marked her examination. It was all a mystery to her;and to every question she answered, "I know nothing about it. " Of MaryEasty it is grateful to have some account. Her own declarations invindication of her innocence are fortunately preserved; and her noblerecord is complete in the following documents. The first appears tohave been addressed to the Special Court, and was presentedimmediately before the trial of Mary Easty. No explanation has comedown to us why Sarah Cloyse was not then also brought to trial. Circumstances to which we have no clew rescued her from the fate ofher sisters. 

 "_The Humble Request of Mary Easty and Sarah Cloyse to the Honored Court humbly showeth_, that, whereas we two sisters, Mary Easty and Sarah Cloyse, stand now before the honored Court charged with the suspicion of witchcraft, our humble request is--First, that, seeing we are neither able to plead our own cause, nor is counsel allowed to those in our condition, that you who are our judges would please to be of counsel to us, to direct us wherein we may stand in need. Secondly, that, whereas we are not conscious to ourselves of any guilt in the least degree of that crime whereof we are now accused (in the presence of the living God we speak it, before whose awful tribunal we know we shall ere long appear), nor of any other scandalous evil or miscarriage inconsistent with Christianity, those who have had the longest and best knowledge of us, being persons of good report, may be suffered to testify upon oath what they know concerning each of us; viz. , Mr. Capen, the pastor, and those of the town and church of Topsfield, who are ready to say something which we hope may be looked upon as very considerable in this matter, with the seven children of one of us; viz. , Mary Easty: and it may be produced of like nature in reference to the wife of Peter Cloyse, her sister. Thirdly, that the testimony of witches, or such as are afflicted as is supposed by witches, may not be improved to condemn us without other legal evidence concurring. We hope the honored Court and jury will be so tender of the lives of such as we are, who have for many years lived under the unblemished reputation of Christianity, as not to condemn them without a fair and equal hearing of what may be said for us as well as against us. And your poor suppliants shall be bound always to pray, &c. "

The following was presented by Mary Easty to the judges after she hadreceived sentence of death. It would be hard to find, in all therecords of human suffering and of Christian deportment under them, amore affecting production. It is a most beautiful specimen of stronggood-sense, pious fortitude and faith, genuine dignity of soul, noblebenevolence, and the true eloquence of a pure heart; and was evidentlycomposed by her own hand. It may be said of her--and there can be nohigher eulogium--that she felt for others more than for herself. 

 "_The Humble Petition of Mary Easty unto his Excellency Sir William Phips, and to the Honored Judge and Bench now sitting in Judicature in Salem, and the Reverend Ministers, humbly showeth_, that, whereas your poor and humble petitioner, being condemned to die, do humbly beg of you to take it in your judicious and pious consideration, that your poor and humble petitioner, knowing my own innocency, blessed be the Lord for it! and seeing plainly the wiles and subtilty of my accusers by myself, cannot but judge charitably of others that are going the same way of myself, if the Lord steps not mightily in. I was confined a whole month upon the same account that I am condemned now for, and then cleared by the afflicted persons, as some of Your Honors know. And in two days' time I was cried out upon them, and have been confined, and now am condemned to die. The Lord above knows my innocency then, and likewise does now, as at the great day will be known to men and angels. I petition to Your Honors not for my own life, for I know I must die, and my appointed time is set; but the Lord he knows it is that, if it be possible, no more innocent blood may be shed, which undoubtedly cannot be avoided in the way and course you go in. I question not but Your Honors do to the utmost of your powers in the discovery and detecting of witchcraft and witches, and would not be guilty of innocent blood for the world. But, by my own innocency, I know you are in the wrong way. The Lord in his infinite mercy direct you in this great work, if it be his blessed will that no more innocent blood be shed! I would humbly beg of you, that Your Honors would be pleased to examine these afflicted persons strictly, and keep them apart some time, and likewise to try some of these confessing witches; I being confident there is several of them, has belied themselves and others, as will appear, if not in this world, I am sure in the world to come, whither I am now agoing. I question not but you will see an alteration of these things. They say myself and others having made a league with the Devil, we cannot confess. I know, and the Lord knows, as will ... Appear, they belie me, and so I question not but they do others. The Lord above, who is the Searcher of all hearts, knows, as I shall answer it at the tribunal seat, that I know not the least thing of witchcraft; therefore I cannot, I dare not, belie my own soul. I beg Your Honors not to deny this my humble petition from a poor, dying, innocent person. And I question not but the Lord will give a blessing to your endeavors. "

The parting interview of this admirable woman with her husband, children, and friends, as she was about proceeding to the place ofexecution, is said to have been a most solemn, affecting, and trulysublime scene. Calef says that her farewell communications, on thisoccasion, were reported, by persons who listened to them, to have been"as serious, religious, distinct, and affectionate as could well beexpressed, drawing tears from the eyes of almost all present. "

Ann Pudeator had been formerly the wife of a person named Greenslitt, who left her with five children. Her subsequent husband, JacobPudeator, died in 1682, and by will gave her his whole estate, afterthe payment of legacies, of five pounds each, to her Greenslittchildren, who appear to have been living in 1692 at Casco Bay. Theseprovisions, as well as the expressions used by Pudeator, indicate thathe regarded her with affection and esteem. The following document isall that we know else of her character particularly, except that shewas a kind neighbor, and ever prompt in offices of charity andsympathy. 

 "_The Humble Petition of Ann Pudeator unto the Honored Judge and Bench now sitting in Judicature in Salem, humbly showeth_, that, whereas your poor and humble petitioner, being condemned to die, and knowing in my own conscience, as I shall shortly answer it before the great God of heaven, who is the Searcher and Knower of all hearts, that the evidence of Jno. Best, Sr. , and Jno. Best, Jr. , and Samuel Pickworth, which was given in against me in Court, were all of them altogether false and untrue, and, besides the abovesaid Jno. Best hath been formerly whipped and likewise is recorded for a liar. I would humbly beg of Your Honors to take it into your judicious and pious consideration, that my life may not be taken away by such false evidences and witnesses as these be; likewise, the evidence given in against me by Sarah Churchill and Mary Warren I am altogether ignorant of, and know nothing in the least measure about it, nor nothing else concerning the crime of witchcraft, for which I am condemned to die, as will be known to men and angels at the great day of judgment. Begging and imploring your prayers at the Throne of Grace in my behalf, and your poor and humble petitioner shall for ever pray, as she is bound in duty, for Your Honors' health and happiness in this life, and eternal felicity in the world to come. "

Abigail, the wife of Francis Faulkner, and daughter of the Rev. Francis Dane, of Andover, who was among those sentenced on the 17th ofSeptember, had been examined, on the 11th of August, by Hathorne, Corwin, and Captain John Higginson, sitting as magistrates. Upon theprisoner's being brought in, the afflicted fell down, and went intofits, as usual. The magistrates asked the prisoner what she had tosay. She replied, "I know nothing of it. " The girls then renewed theirperformances, declaring that her shape was at that moment torturingthem. The magistrates asked her if she did not see their sufferings. She answered, "Yes; but it is the Devil does it in my shape. " AnnPutnam said that her spectre had afflicted her a few days before, pulling her off her horse. Upon the touch of her person, thesufferings of the afflicted would cease for a time. The prisoner helda handkerchief in her hand. The girls would screech out, declaringthat, as she pressed the handkerchief, they were dreadfully squeezed. She threw the handkerchief on the table; and they said, "There are theshapes of Daniel Eames and Captain Floyd [two persons then in prisonon the charge of witchcraft] sitting on her handkerchief. " Mary Warrenenacted the part of being dragged against her will under the table byan invisible hand, from whose grasp she was at once released, upon theprisoner's being made to touch her. Notwithstanding all this, sheprotested her innocence, and was remanded to jail. On the 30th, shewas brought out again. In the mean while, six had been executed. Theusual means were employed to break her down; but all that was gainedwas, that she owned she had expressed her indignation at the conductof the afflicted, and was much excited against them "for bringing herkindred out, and she did wish them ill: and, her spirit being raised, she did pinch her hands together, and she knew not but that the Devilmight take that advantage; but it was the Devil, and not she, thatafflicted them. " This was the only concession she would make; and theywere puzzled to determine whether it was a confession, or not, --ithaving rather the appearance of clearing herself from all implicationwith the Devil, and leaving him on their hands--at any rate, theyconcluded to regard it in the latter sense; and she was dulyconvicted, and sentenced to death. Sir William Phips ordered areprieve; and, after she had been thirteen weeks in prison, hedirected her to be discharged on the ground of insufficient evidence. This, I think, is the only instance of a special pardon granted duringthe proceedings. 

Samuel Wardwell, like most of the accused belonging to Andover, hadoriginally joined the crowd of the confessors; but he was too much ofa man to remain in that company. He took back his confession, and methis death. While he was speaking to the people, at the gallows, declaring his innocency, a puff of tobacco-smoke from the pipe of theexecutioner, as Calef informs us, "coming in his face, interrupted hisdiscourse: those accusers said that the Devil did hinder him withsmoke. " The wicked creatures followed their victims to the last withtheir malignant outrages. The cart that carried the prisoners, on thisoccasion, to the hill, "was for some time at a set: the afflicted andothers said that the Devil hindered it, " &c. 

The route by which they were conveyed from the jail, which was at thenorth corner of Federal and St. Peter's Streets, to the gallows, musthave been a cruelly painful and fatiguing one, particularly to infirmand delicate persons, as many of them were. It was through St. Peter's, up the whole length of Essex, and thence probably alongBoston Street, far towards Aborn Street; for the hill could only beascended from that direction. It must have been a rough and joltingoperation; and it is not strange that the cart got "set. " It seemsthat the prisoners were carried in a single cart. It was a large one, provided probably for the occasion; and it is not unlikely that thereason why some who had been condemned were not executed, was that thecart could not hold them all at once. They were executed, one in June, five in July, five in August, and eight in September, with theintention, no doubt, by taking them in instalments, to extend the actsof the tragedy, from month to month, indefinitely. 

It was necessary for the safety of the accusers and prosecutors toprevent a revulsion of the public mind, or even the least diminutionof the popular violence against the supposed witches. As they allprotested their innocence to the moment of death, and exhibited aremarkably Christian deportment throughout the dreadful scenes theywere called to encounter from their arrest to their execution, therewas reason to apprehend that the people would gradually be led to feela sympathy for them, if not to entertain doubts of their guilt. Toprevent this, and remove any impressions favorable to them that mightbe made by the conduct and declarations of the convicts, theprosecutors were on the alert. After the prisoners had been swung off, on the 22d of September, "turning him to the bodies, Mr. Noyes said, 'What a sad thing it is to see eight firebrands of hell hangingthere!'" It was the last time his eyes were regaled by such a sight. There were no more executions on Witch Hill. 

Three days before, a life had been taken by the officers of the law ina manner so extraordinary, and marked by features so shocking, thatthey find no parallel in the annals of America, and will continue toarrest for ever the notice of mankind. The history and character ofold Giles Corey have been given in preceding parts of this work. Theonly papers relating to him, on file as having been sworn to beforethe Grand Jury, are a few brief depositions. If he had been put ontrial, we might have had more. Elizabeth Woodwell testifies, that "shesaw Giles Corey at meeting at Salem on a lecture-day, since he hasbeen in prison. He or his apparition came in, and sat in themiddlemost seat of the men's seats, by the post. This was thelecture-day before Bridget Bishop was hanged. And I saw him come outwith the rest of the people. " Mary Walcot, of course, swore to thesame. And Mary Warren swore that Corey was hostile to her andafflicted her, because he thought she "caused her master (JohnProcter) to ask more for a piece of meadow than he (Corey) was willingto give. " She also charged him with "afflicting of her" by his spectrewhile he was in prison, and "described him in all his garments, bothof hat, coat, and the color of them, --with a cord about his waist anda white cap on his head, and in chains. " There is reason to believe, that, while in prison, he experienced great distress of mind. Althoughhe had been a rough character in earlier life, and given occasion tomuch scandal by his disregard of public opinion, he always exhibitedsymptoms of a generous and sensitive nature. His foolish conduct inbecoming so passionately engaged in the witchcraft proceedings, attheir earliest stage, as to be incensed against his wife because shedid not approve of or believe in them, and which led him to uttersentiments and expressions that had been used against her; and so faryielding to the accusers as to allow them to get from him thedeposition, which, while it failed to satisfy their demands, it wasshameful for him to have been persuaded to give, --all these things, which after his own apprehension and imprisonment he had leisure toponder upon, preyed on his mind. He saw the awful character of thedelusion to which he had lent himself; that it had brought hisprayerful and excellent wife to the sentence of death, which hadalready been executed upon many other devout and worthy persons. Heknew that he was innocent of the crime of witchcraft, and was nowsatisfied that all others were. Besides his own unfriendly coursetowards his wife, two of his four sons-in-law had turned against her. One (Crosby) had testified, and another (Parker) had allowed his nameto be used, as an adverse witness. In view of all this, Corey made uphis mind, determined on his course, and stood to that determination. He resolved to expiate his own folly by a fate that would satisfy thedemands of the sternest criticism upon his conduct; proclaim hisabhorrence of the prosecutions; and attest the strength of hisfeelings towards those of his children who had been false, and thosewho had been true, to his wife. He caused to be drawn up what hasbeen called a will, although it is in reality a deed, and was dulyrecorded as such. Its phraseology is very strongly guarded, and madeto give it clear, full, and certain effect. It begins thus: "Know ye, &c. , that I, Giles Corey, lying under great trouble and affliction, through which I am very weak in body, but in perfect memory, --knowingnot how soon I may depart this life; in consideration of which, andfor the fatherly love and affection which I have and do bear unto mybeloved son-in-law, William Cleeves, of the town of Beverly, and to myson-in-law, John Moulton, of the town of Salem, as also for diversother good causes and considerations me at the present especiallymoving;" and proceeds to convey and confirm all his property--"lands, meadow, housing, cattle, stock, movables and immovables, money, apparel, ... And all other the aforesaid premises, with theirappurtenances"--to the said Cleeves and Moulton "for ever, freely andquietly, without any manner of challenge, claim, or demand of me thesaid Giles Corey, or of any other person or persons whatsoever for mein my name, or by my cause, means, or procurement;" and, in the use ofall the language applicable to that end, he warrants and binds himselfto defend the aforesaid conveyance and grant to Cleeves and Moulton, their heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns for ever. Thedocument was properly signed, sealed, and delivered in the presence ofcompetent witnesses, whose several signatures are indorsed to thateffect. It was duly acknowledged before "Thomas Wade, Justice of thePeace in Essex, " and recorded forthwith. This transaction took placein the jail at Ipswich. 

His whole property being thus securely conveyed to his faithfulsons-in-law, and placed beyond the reach of his own weakness or changeof purpose, Corey resolved on a course that would surely try to theutmost the power of human endurance and firmness. He knew, that, ifbrought to trial, his death was certain. He did not know but thatconviction and execution, through the attainder connected with it, might invalidate all attempts of his to convey his property. But itwas certain, that, if he should not be brought to trial andconviction, his deed would stand, and nothing could break it, ordefeat its effect. He accordingly made up his mind not to be tried. When called into court to answer to the indictment found by the GrandJury, he did not plead "Guilty, " or "Not guilty, " but stood mute. Howoften he was called forth, we are not informed; but nothing couldshake him. No power on earth could unseal his lips. 

He knew that he could have no trial that would deserve the name. Tohave pleaded "Not guilty" would have made him, by his own act, a partyto the proceeding, and have been, by implication, an assent to puttinghis case to the decision of a blind, maddened, and utterly pervertedtribunal. He would not, by any act or utterance of his, leave his casewith "the country" represented by a jury that embodied the passions ofthe deluded and infatuated multitude around him. He knew that thegates of justice were closed, and that truth had fled from the scene. He would have no part nor lot in the matter; refused to recognize thecourt, made no response to its questions, and was dumb in itspresence. He stands alone in the resolute defiance of his attitude. Heknew the penalty of suffering and agony he would have to pay; but hefreely and fearlessly encountered it. All that was needed to carry hispoint was an unconquerable firmness, and he had it. He rendered itimpossible to bring him to trial; and thereby, in spite of the powerand wrath of the whole country and its authorities, retained his rightto dispose of his property; and bore his testimony against thewickedness and folly of the hour in tones that reached the wholeworld, and will resound through all the ages. 

When Corey took this ground, the Court found itself in a position ofno little difficulty, and was probably at a loss what to do. Noinformation has come to us of the details of the proceedings. If theusages in England on such occasions were adopted, the prisoner wasthree times brought before the Court, and called to plead; theconsequences of persisting in standing mute being solemnly announcedto him at each time. If he remained obdurate, the sentence of _peineforte et dure_ was passed upon him; and, remanded to prison, he wasput into a low and dark apartment. He would there be laid on his backon the bare floor, naked for the most part. A weight of iron would beplaced upon him, not quite enough to crush him. He would have nosustenance, save only, on the first day, three morsels of the worstbread; and, on the second day, three draughts of standing water thatshould be nearest to the prison door: and, in this situation, suchwould be alternately his daily diet till he died, or till he answered. The object of this terrible punishment was to induce the prisoner toplead to the indictment; upon doing which, he would be brought totrial in the ordinary way. The motive that led prisoners to stand mutein England is stated to have been, most generally, to save theirproperty from confiscation. The practice of putting weights upon them, and gradually increasing them, was to force them, by the slowlyincreasing torture, to yield. 

How far the English practice was imitated in the case of Corey willremain for ever among the dread secrets of his prison-house. Thetradition is, that the last act in the tragedy was in an open fieldnear the jail, somewhere between Howard-street Burial Ground and BrownStreet. It is said that Corey urged the executioners to increase theweight which was crushing him, that he told them it was of no use toexpect him to yield, that there could be but one way of ending thematter, and that they might as well pile on the rocks. Calef says, that, as his body yielded to the pressure, his tongue protruded fromhis mouth, and an official forced it back with his cane. Some personsnow living remember a popular superstition, lingering in the minds ofsome of the more ignorant class, that Corey's ghost haunted thegrounds where this barbarous deed was done; and that boys, as theysported in the vicinity, were in the habit of singing a dittybeginning thus:--

 "'More weight! more weight!' Giles Corey he cried. "

For a person of more than eighty-one years of age, this must beallowed to have been a marvellous exhibition of prowess; illustrating, as strongly as any thing in human history, the power of a resolutewill over the utmost pain and agony of body, and demonstrating thatGiles Corey was a man of heroic nerve, and of a spirit that could notbe subdued. 

It produced a deep effect, as it was feared that it would. The bearingof all the sufferers at all the stages of the proceedings, and attheir execution, had told in their favor; but the course of GilesCorey profoundly affected the public mind. This must have been noticedby the managers of the prosecutions; and they felt that someextraordinary expedient was necessary to renew, and render moreintense than ever, the general infatuation. From the very beginning, there had been great skill and adroitness in arranging the order ofincidents, and supplying the requisite excitements at the rightmoments and the right points. Some persons--it can only be conjecturedwho--had, all along, been behind the scenes, giving direction andmaterials to the open actors. This unseen power was in the village;and the movements it devised generally proceeded from Thomas Putnam'shouse, or the parsonage. It was on hand to meet the contingencycreated by Corey's having actually carried out to the last hisresolution to meet a form of death that would, if any thing could, cause a re-action in the public mind; and the following stratagem wascontrived to turn the manner of his death into the means of more thanever blinding and infatuating the people. It was the last and one ofthe most artful strokes of policy by the prosecutors. On the day afterthe death of Corey, and two days before the execution of his wife, Mary Easty, and the six others, Judge Sewall, then in Salem, receiveda letter from Thomas Putnam to this effect:--

 "Last night, my daughter Ann was grievously tormented by witches, threatening that she should be pressed to death before Giles Corey; but, through the goodness of a gracious God, she had at last a little respite. Whereupon there appeared unto her (she said) a man in a winding-sheet, who told her that Giles Corey had murdered him by pressing him to death with his feet; but that the Devil there appeared unto him, and covenanted with him, and promised him that he should not be hanged. The apparition said God hardened his heart, that he should not hearken to the advice of the Court, and so die an easy death; because, as it said, it must be done to him as he has done to me. The apparition also said that Giles Corey was carried to the Court for this, and that the jury had found the murder; and that her father knew the man, and the thing was done before she was born. "

Cotton Mather represented this vision, made to Ann Putnam, as proofpositive of a divine communication to her, because, as he says, shecould not have received her information from a human source, aseverybody had forgotten the affair long ago; and that she never couldhave heard of it, happening, as it did, before she was born. Bringingup this old matter to meet the effect produced by Corey's death wasindeed a skilful move; and it answered its purpose probably to aconsiderable extent. The man whom Corey was thus charged with havingmurdered seventeen years before died in a manner causing some gossipat the time; and a coroner's jury found that he had been "bruised todeath, having clodders of blood about the heart. " Bringing the affairback to the public mind, with the story of Ann Putnam's vision, waswell calculated to meet and check any sympathy that might threaten toarise in favor of Corey. But the trick, however ingenious, will notstand the test of scrutiny. Mather's statement that everybody hadforgotten the transaction, and that Ann could only have known of itsupernaturally, is wholly untenable; for it was precisely one of thosethings that are never forgotten in a country village: it had alwaysbeen kept alive as a part of the gossip of the neighborhood inconnection with Corey; and her own father, as is unwittinglyacknowledged, knew the man, and all about it. Of course, the girl hadheard of it from him and others. The industry that had ransacked thetraditions and collected the scandal of the whole country, far andnear, for stories that were brought in evidence against all theprisoners, had not failed to pick up this choice bit against Corey. The only reason why it had not before been brought out was because hehad not been on trial. The man who died with "clodders of blood abouthis heart, " seventeen years before, was an unfortunate and worthlessperson, who had incurred punishment for his misconduct while a servanton Corey's farm, and afterwards at the hands of his own family: and hedoes not appear to have mended his morals upon passing into thespiritual world; for the statement of his ghost to Ann Putnam, thatthe jury had found Corey guilty of murder, and that the Court washindered by some enchantment from proceeding against him, is disprovedby the record which is--as has been mentioned in the First Part, vol. I. P. 185--that the man was carried back to his house by Corey's wife, and died there some time after; and the Court did no more than fineCorey for the punishment he had inflicted upon him while in hisservice, and which the evidence showed was repeated by his parentsafter his return to his own family. 

Thomas Putnam's letter and Ann's vision were the last things of thekind that occurred. The delusion was approaching its close, and thepeople were beginning to be restored to their senses. 

When it became known that Corey's resolution was likely to hold out, and that no torments or cruelties of any kind could subdue his firmand invincible spirit, Mr. Noyes hurried a special meeting of hischurch on a week-day, and had the satisfaction of dealing the sameawful doom upon him as upon Rebecca Nurse. The entry in the record ofthe First Church is as follows:--

 "Sept. 18, G. Corey was excommunicated: the cause of it was, that he being accused and indicted for the sin of witchcraft, he refused to plead, and so incurred the sentence and penalty of _pain fort dure_; being undoubtedly either guilty of the sin of witchcraft, or of throwing himself upon sudden and certain death, if he were otherwise innocent. "

This attempt to introduce a form of argument into a church act ofexcommunication is a slight but significant symptom of its havingbecome felt that the breath of reason had begun to raise a ripple uponthe surface of the public mind. It increased slowly, but steadily to agale that beat with severity upon Mr. Noyes and all hisfellow-persecutors to their dying day. 

After the executions, on the 22d of September, the Court adjourned tomeet some weeks subsequently; and it was, no doubt, their expectationto continue from month to month to hold sessions, and supply, eachtime, new cart-loads of victims to the hangman. But a sudden collapsetook place in the machinery, and they met no more. The executiveauthority intervened, and their functions ceased. The curtain fellunexpectedly, and the tragedy ended. It is not known precisely whatcaused this sudden change. It is probable, that a revolution had beengoing on some time in the public mind, which was kept for a while fromnotice, but at last became too apparent and too serious to bedisregarded. It has generally been attributed to the fact, that thegirls became over-confident, and struck too high. They had ventured, as we have seen, to cry out against the Rev. Samuel Willard, but wererebuked and silenced by the Court. Whoever began to waver in hisconfidence of the correctness of the proceedings was in danger ofbeing attacked by them; and, as a general thing, when a person was"cried out upon, " it may be taken as proof that he had spoken againstthem. Increase Mather, the president of Harvard College, called byEliot "the father of the New-England clergy, " was understood not to goso far as his son Cotton in sustaining the proceedings; and a memberof his family was accused. The wife of Sir William Phips sympathizedwith those who suffered prosecution, and is said to have written anorder for the release of a prisoner from jail. She was cried out upon. It may have been noticed, that, though Jonathan Corwin sat withHathorne as an examining magistrate and assistant, and signed thecommitments of the prisoners, he never took an active part, but was asilent and passive agent in the scene. He was subsequently raised tothe bench; but there is reason to believe that his mind was not clearas to the correctness of the proceedings. This probably became knownto the accusing girls; for they cried out repeatedly against hiswife's mother, a respectable and venerable lady in Boston. Theaccusers, in aiming at such characters, overestimated their power; andthe tide began to turn against them. But what finally broke the spellby which they had held the minds of the whole colony in bondage wastheir accusation, in October, of Mrs. Hale, the wife of the ministerof the First Church in Beverly. Her genuine and distinguished virtueshad won for her a reputation, and secured in the hearts of the peoplea confidence, which superstition itself could not sully nor shake. Mr. Hale had been active in all the previous proceedings; but he knew theinnocence and piety of his wife, and he stood forth between her andthe storm he had helped to raise: although he had driven it on whileothers were its victims, he turned and resisted it when it burst inupon his own dwelling. The whole community became convinced that theaccusers in crying out upon Mrs. Hale, had perjured themselves, andfrom that moment their power was destroyed; the awful delusion wasdispelled, and a close put to one of the most tremendous tragedies inthe history of real life. The wildest storm, perhaps, that ever ragedin the moral world, became a calm; the tide that had threatened tooverwhelm every thing in its fury, sunk back to its peaceful bed. There are few, if any, other instances in history, of a revolution ofopinion and feeling so sudden, so rapid, and so complete. The imagesand visions that had possessed the bewildered imaginations of thepeople flitted away, and left them standing in the sunshine of reasonand their senses; and they could have exclaimed, as they witnessedthem passing off, in the language of the great master of the drama andof human nature, but that their rigid Puritan principles would not, itis presumed, have permitted them, even in that moment of rescue anddeliverance, to quote Shakspeare, --

 "The earth hath bubbles, as the water has, And these are of them. Whither are they vanished? Into the air; and what seemed corporal, melted As breath into the wind. "

Sir William Phips well knew that the public sentiment demanded a stopto be put to the prosecutions. Besides that many of the people hadlost all faith in the grounds on which they had been conducted, aninfluence from the higher orders of society began to make itself felt. Hutchinson says, "Although many such had suffered, yet there remainedin prison a number of women of as reputable families as any in thetowns where they lived, and several persons, of still superior rank, were hinted at by the pretended bewitched, or by the confessingwitches. Some had been publicly named. Dudley Bradstreet, a justice ofpeace, who had been appointed one of President Dudley's council, andwho was son to the worthy old governor, then living, found itnecessary to abscond. Having been remiss in prosecuting, he had beencharged by some of the afflicted as a confederate. His brother, JohnBradstreet, was forced to fly also. "

The termination of the proceedings was probably effectually secured bythe spirited course of certain parties in Andover, who, at the firstmoment of its appearing that the public sentiment was changing, commenced actions for slander against the accusers. 

The result of the whole matter was, that, while some of the judges, magistrates, and ministers persisted in their fanatical zeal, thegreat body of the people, high and low, were rescued from thedelusion. 

While, in the course of our story, we have witnessed some shockinginstances of the violation of the most sacred affections andobligations of life, in husbands and wives, parents and children, testifying against each other, and exerting themselves for mutualdestruction, we must not overlook the many instances in which filial, parental, and fraternal fidelity and love have shone conspicuously. Itwas dangerous to befriend an accused person. Procter stood by his wifeto protect her, and it cost him his life. Children protested againstthe treatment of their parents, and they were all thrown into prison. Daniel Andrew, a citizen of high standing, who had been deputy to theGeneral Court, asserted, in the boldest language, his belief ofRebecca Nurse's innocence; and he had to fly the country to save hislife. Many devoted sons and daughters clung to their parents, visitedthem in prison in defiance of a bloodthirsty mob; kept by their sideon the way to execution; expressed their love, sympathy, and reverenceto the last; and, by brave and perilous enterprise, got possession oftheir remains, and bore them back under the cover of midnight to theirown thresholds, and to graves kept consecrated by their prayers andtears. One noble young man is said to have effected his mother'sescape from the jail, and secreted her in the woods until after thedelusion had passed away, provided food and clothing for her, erecteda wigwam for her shelter, and surrounded her with every comfort hersituation would admit of. The poor creature must, however, haveendured a great amount of suffering; for one of her larger limbs wasfractured in the all but desperate attempt to rescue her from theprison-walls. 

The Special Court being no longer suffered to meet, a permanent andregular tribunal, called the Superior Court of Judicature, wasestablished, consisting of the Deputy-governor, William Stoughton, Chief-justice; and Thomas Danforth, John Richards, Wait Winthrop, andSamuel Sewall, associate justices. They held a Court at Salem, inJanuary, 1693. Hutchinson says that, on this occasion, the Grand Juryfound about fifty indictments. The following persons were brought totrial: Rebecca Jacobs, Margaret Jacobs, Sarah Buckley, Job Tookey, Hannah Tyler, Candy, Mary Marston, Elizabeth Johnson, Abigail Barker, Mary Tyler, Sarah Hawkes, Mary Wardwell, Mary Bridges, Hannah Post, Sarah Bridges, Mary Osgood, Mary Lacy, Jr. , Sarah Wardwell, ElizabethJohnson, Jr. , and Mary Post. The three last were condemned, but notexecuted: all the rest were acquitted. Considering that the "spectralevidence" was wholly thrown out at these trials, the facts that thegrand jury, under the advice of the Court, brought in so manyindictments, and that three were actually convicted, are asdiscreditable to the regular Court as the convictions at the SpecialCourt are to that body. It has been said that the Special Court hadnot an adequate representation of lawyers in its composition; and theresults of its proceedings have been ascribed to that circumstance. Ithas been held up disparagingly in comparison with the regular Courtthat succeeded it. But, in fact, the regular Court consisted ofpersons all of whom sat in the Special Court, with the exception ofDanforth. But his proceedings in originating the arrests forwitchcraft in the fall of 1691, and his action when presiding at thepreliminary examination of John Procter, Elizabeth Procter, and SarahCloyse, at Salem, April 11, 1692, show that, so far as the permissionof gross irregularities and the admission of absurd kinds of testimonyare concerned, the regular Court gained nothing by his sitting withit, unless his views had been thoroughly changed in the mean time. Thetruth is, that the judges, magistrates, and legislature were as muchto blame, in this whole business, as the ministers, and much more slowto come to their senses, and make amends for their wrong-doing. 

All the facts known to us, and all the statements that have come downto us, require us to believe, that none who confessed, and stood totheir confession, were brought to trial. All who were condemned eithermaintained their innocence from the first, or, if persuaded orovercome into a confession, voluntarily took it back and disowned itbefore trial. If this be so, then the name of every person condemnedought to be held in lasting honor, as preferring to die rather thanlie, or stand to a lie. It required great strength of mind to takeback a confession; relinquish life and liberty; go down into adungeon, loaded with irons; and from thence to ascend the gallows. Itrelieves the mind to think, that Abigail Hobbs, wicked and shockingas her conduct had been towards Mr. Burroughs and others, came toherself, and offered her life in atonement for her sin. 

The Court continued the trials at successive sessions during thespring, all resulting in acquittals, until in May, 1693, Sir WilliamPhips, by proclamation, discharged all. Hutchinson says, "Such ajail-delivery has never been known in New England. " The number thenreleased is stated to have been one hundred and fifty. How many hadbeen apprehended, during the whole affair, we have no means ofknowing. Twenty, counting Giles Corey, had been executed. Two atleast, Ann Foster and Sarah Osburn, had died in jail: it is notimprobable that others perished under the bodily and mental sufferingsthere. We find frequent expressions indicating that many died inprison. A considerable number of children, and some adults whosefriends were able to give the heavy bonds required and had influenceenough to secure the favor, had some time before been removed toprivate custody. Quite a considerable number had succeeded in breakingjail and eluding recapture. Upon the whole, there must have beenseveral hundreds committed. Even after acquittal by a jury, and theGovernor's proclamation, none were set at liberty until they had paidall charges; including board for the whole time of their imprisonment, jailer's fees, and fees of Court of all kinds. The families of manyhad become utterly impoverished. 

The sufferings of the prisoners and of their relatives and connectionsare perhaps best illustrated by presenting the substance of a few ofthe petitions for their release, found among the files. The friends ofthe parties, in these cases, were not in a condition to give thebonds, and they probably remained in jail until the general discharge;and how long after, before the means could be raised to pay all dues, we cannot know. [A]

[Footnote A: On the 19th of October, 1692, Thomas Hart, of Lynn, presented a memorial to the General Court, stating that his mother, Elizabeth Hart, had then been in Boston jail for nearly six months:"Though, in all this time, nothing has appeared against her whereby torender her deserving of imprisonment or death, ... Being ancient, andnot able to undergo the hardship that is inflicted from lying inmisery, and death rather to be chosen than a life in hercircumstances. " He says, that his father is "ancient and decrepit, andwholly unable" to take any steps in her behalf; that he feels "obligedby all Christian duty, as becomes a child to parents, " to lay her casebefore the General Court. "The petitioner having lived from hischildhood under the same roof with his mother, he dare presume toaffirm that he never saw nor knew any evil or sinful practice whereinthere was any show of impiety nor witchcraft by her; and, were itotherwise, he would not, for the world and all the enjoyments thereof, nourish or support any creature that he knew engaged in the drudgeryof Satan. It is well known to all the neighborhood, that thepetitioner's mother has lived a sober and godly life, always ready todischarge the part of a good Christian, and never deserving ofafflictions from the hands of men for any thing of this nature. " Hehumbly prays "for the speedy enlargement of this person so muchabused. " I present two more petitions. They help to fill up thepicture of the sufferings and hardships borne by individuals andfamilies. 

 "_To the Honored General Court now sitting in Boston, the Humble Petition of Nicholas Rist, of Reading, showeth_, that whereas Sara Rist, wife of the petitioner, was taken into custody the first day of June last, and, ever since lain in Boston jail for witchcraft; though, in all this time, nothing has been made appear for which she deserved imprisonment or death: the petitioner has been a husband to the said woman above twenty years, in all which time he never had reason to accuse her for any impiety or witchcraft, but the contrary. She lived with him as a good, faithful, dutiful wife, and always had respect to the ordinances of God while her strength remained; and the petitioner, on that consideration, is obliged in conscience and justice to use all lawful means for the support and preservation of her life; and it is deplorable, that, in old age, the poor decrepit woman should lie under confinement so long in a stinking jail, when her circumstances rather require a nurse to attend her. 

 "May it, therefore, please Your Honors to take this matter into your prudent consideration, and direct some speedy methods whereby this ancient decrepit person may not for ever lie in such misery, wherein her life is made more afflictive to her than death. "

 "_The Humble Petition of Thomas Barrett, of Chelmsford, in New England, in behalf of his daughter Martha Sparkes, wife of Henry Sparkes, who is now a soldier in Their Majesties' Service at the Eastern Parts, and so hath been for a considerable time, humbly showeth_, That your petitioner's daughter hath lain in prison in Boston for the space of twelve months and five days, being committed by Thomas Danforth, Esq. , the late deputy-governor, upon suspicion of witchcraft; since which no evidence hath appeared against her in any such matter, neither hath any given bond to prosecute her, nor doth any one at this day accuse her of any such thing, as your petitioner knows of. That your petitioner hath ever since kept two of her children; the one of five years, the other of two years old, which hath been a considerable trouble and charge to him in his poor and mean condition: besides, your petitioner hath a lame, ancient, and sick wife, who, for these five years and upwards past, hath been so afflicted as that she is altogether rendered uncapable of affording herself any help, which much augments his trouble. Your poor petitioner earnestly and humbly entreats Your Excellency and Honors to take his distressed condition into your consideration; and that you will please to order the releasement of his daughter from her confinement, whereby she may return home to her poor children to look after them, having nothing to pay the charge of her confinement. 

 "And your petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray. 

 "Nov. 1, 1692. "]

Margaret Jacobs had to remain in jail after the Governor'sproclamation had directed the release of all prisoners, because shecould not pay the fees and charges. Her grandfather had been executed, and all his furniture, stock, and moveable property seized by themarshal or sheriff. Her father escaped the warrant by a sudden flightfrom his home under the cover of midnight, and was in exile "beyondthe seas;" her mother and herself taken at the time by the officersserving the warrants against them; the younger children of the family, left without protection, had dispersed, and been thrown upon thecharity of neighbors; the house had been stripped of its contents, left open, and deserted. She had not a shilling in the world, and knewnot where to look for aid. She was taken back to prison, and remainedthere for some time, until a person named Gammon, apparently astranger, happened to hear of her case, and, touched with compassion, raised the money required, and released her. It was long before theaffairs of the Jacobs' family were so far retrieved as to enable themto refund the money to the noble-hearted fisherman. How many otherslingered in prison, or how long, we have no means of ascertaining. 

In reviewing the proceedings at the examinations and trials, it isimpossible to avoid being struck with the infatuation of themagistrates and judges. They acted throughout in the character andspirit of prosecuting officers, put leading and ensnaring questions tothe prisoners, adopted a browbeating deportment towards them, andpursued them with undisguised hostility. They assumed their guilt fromthe first, and endeavored to force them to confess; treating them asobstinate culprits because they would not. Every kind of irregularitywas permitted. The marshal was encouraged in perpetual interference toprejudice the persons on trial, watching and reporting aloud to theCourt every movement of their hands or heads or feet. Other personswere allowed to speak out, from the body of the crowd, whatever theychose to say adverse to the prisoner. Accusers were suffered to makeprivate communications to the magistrates and judges before or duringthe hearings. The presiding officers showed off their smartness inattempts to make the persons on trial before them appear at adisadvantage. In some instances, as in the case of Sarah Good, themagistrate endeavored to deceive the accused by representing falselythe testimony given by another. The people in and around thecourt-room were allowed to act the part of a noisy mob, by clamors andthreatening outcries; and juries were overawed to bring in verdicts ofconviction, and rebuked from the bench if they exercised theirrightful prerogative without regard to the public passions. Thechief-justice, in particular, appears to have been actuated by violentprejudice against the prisoners, and to have conducted the trials, allalong, with a spirit that bears the aspect of animosity. 

There is one point of view in which he must be held responsible forthe blood that was shed, and the infamy that, in consequence, attachesto the proceedings. It may well be contended, that not a convictionwould have taken place, but for a notion of his which he arbitrarilyenforced as a rule of law. It was a part of the theory relating towitchcraft, that the Devil made use of the spectres, or apparitions, of some persons to afflict others. From this conceded postulate, adivision of opinion arose. Some maintained that the Devil could employonly the spectres of persons in league with him; others affirmed, thathe could send upon his evil errands the spectres of innocent persons, without their consent or knowledge. The chief-justice held the formeropinion, against the judgment of many others, arbitrarily establishedit as a rule of Court, and peremptorily instructed juries to regard itas binding upon them in making their verdicts. The consequence wasthat a verdict of "Guilty" became inevitable. But few at that timedoubted the veracity of the "afflicted persons, " which was thought tobe demonstrated to the very senses by their fits and sufferings, inthe presence of the Court, jury, and all beholders. When they sworethat they saw the shapes of Bridget Bishop, or Rebecca Nurse, orGeorge Burroughs, choking or otherwise torturing a person, the factwas regarded as beyond question. 

The prisoners took the ground, that the statements made by thewitnesses, even if admitted, were not proof against them; for theDevil might employ the spectres of innocent persons, or of whomsoeverhe chose, without the knowledge of the persons whose shapes were thusused by him. When Mrs. Ann Putnam swore that she had seen the spectreof Rebecca Nurse afflicting various persons; and that the saidspectre acknowledged to her, that "she had killed Benjamin Houlton, and John Fuller, and Rebecca Shepard, "--the answer of the prisonerwas, "I cannot help it: the Devil may appear in my shape. " When theexamining magistrate put the question to Susanna Martin, "How comesyour appearance to hurt these?" Martin replied, "I cannot tell. Hethat appeared in Samuel's shape, a glorified saint, can appear in anyone's shape. " The Rev. John Wise, in his noble appeal in favor of JohnProcter, argued to the same point. But the chief-justice wasinexorably deaf to all reason; compelled the jury to receive, asabsolute law, that the Devil could not use the shape of an innocentperson; and, as the "afflicted" swore that they saw the shapes of theprisoners actually engaged in the diabolical work, there was no roomleft for question, and they must return a verdict of "Guilty. "

In this way, innocent persons were slaughtered by a dogma in the mindof an obstinate judge. Dogmas have perverted courts and governments inall ages. A fabrication of fancy, an arbitrary verbal proposition, hasbeen exalted above reason, and made to extinguish common sense. Theworld is full of such dogmas. They mislead the actions of men, andconfound the page of history. "The king cannot die" is one of them. Itis held as an axiom of political and constitutional truth. So anentire dynasty, crowded with a more glorious life than any other, isstruck from the annals of an empire. In the public records ofEngland, the existence of the Commonwealth is ignored; and the tracesof its great events are erased from the archives of the government, which, in all its formulas and official papers, proclaims a lie. Ahunted fugitive, wandering in disguise through foreign lands, withouta foot of ground on the globe that he could call his own, is declaredin all public acts, parliamentary and judicial, and even by thoseassuming to utter the voice of history, to have actually reigned allthe time. In our country and in our day, we are perplexed, and ourpublic men bewildered, by a similar dogma. The merest fabric of humancontrivance, a particular form of political society, is impiouslyclothed with an essential attribute of God alone; and ephemeralpoliticians are announcing, as an eternal law of Providence, that "aState cannot die. " The mischiefs that result, in the management ofhuman affairs, from enthroning dogmas over reason, truth, and fact, are, as they ever have been, incalculable. 

Chief-justice Stoughton appears to have kept his mind chained to hisdogma to the last. It rendered him wholly incapable of opening hiseyes to the light of truth. He held on to spectral evidence, and hiscorollary from it, when everybody else had abandoned both. He wouldnot admit that he, or any one concerned, had been in error. He nevercould bear to hear any persons express penitence or regret for thepart they had taken in the proceedings. When the public delusion hadso far subsided that it became difficult to procure the execution of awitch, he was disturbed and incensed to such a degree that heabandoned his seat on the bench. During a session of the Court atCharlestown, in January, 1692-3, "word was brought in, that a reprievewas sent to Salem, and had prevented the execution of seven of thosethat were there condemned, which so moved the chief judge that he saidto this effect: 'We were in a way to have cleared the land of them;who it is that obstructs the cause of justice, I know not: the Lord bemerciful to the country!' and so went off the bench, and came no moreinto that Court. "

I have spoken of the judges as appearing to be infatuated, not onaccount of the opinions they held on the subject of witchcraft, forthese were the opinions of their age; nor from the peculiar doctrinetheir chief enforced upon them, for that was entertained by many, and, as a mere theory, was perhaps as logically deducible from theprevalent doctrines as any other. Their infatuation consisted in nothaving eyes to see, or ears to hear, evidences continually occurringof the untruthful arts and tricks of the afflicted children, of theircunning evasions, and, in some instances, palpable falsehoods. Then, further, there was solid and substantial evidence before them thatought to have made them pause and consider, if not doubt anddisbelieve. We find the following paper among the files:--

 THE TESTIMONY OF JOHN PUTNAM, SR. , AND REBECCA HIS WIFE, saith that our son-in-law John Fuller, and our daughter Rebecca Shepard, did both of them die a most violent death (and died acting very strangely at the time of their death); further saith, that we did judge then that they both died of a malignant fever, and had no suspicion of withcraft [Transcriber's Note: so in original] of any, neither can we accuse the prisoner at the bar of any such thing. "

When we recall the testimony of Ann Putnam the mother, and find thatthe afflicted generally charged the death of the above-named personsupon the shape of Rebecca Nurse, we perceive how absolutely CaptainJohn Putnam and his wife discredit their testimony. The opinion of thefather and mother of Fuller and Shepard ought to have had weight withthe Court. They were persons of the highest standing, and ofrecognized intelligence and judgment. They were old church-members, and eminently orthodox in all their sentiments. They were the heads ofa great family. He had represented the town in the General Court theyear before. No man in this part of the country was more noted forstrong good sense than Captain John Putnam. This deposition ishonorable to their memory, and clears them from all responsibility forthe extent to which the afflicted persons were allowed to sway thejudgment of the Court. Taken in connection with the paper signed by solarge a portion of the best people of the village, in behalf ofRebecca Nurse, it proves that the blame for the shocking proceedingsin the witchcraft prosecutions cannot be laid upon the localpopulation, but rests wholly upon the Court and the publicauthorities. 

The Special Court that condemned the persons charged with witchcraftin 1692 is justly open to censure for the absence of alldiscrimination of evidence, and for a prejudgment of the casessubmitted to them. In view of the then existing law and the practicein the mother-country under it, they ought to have the benefit of theadmission that they did, in other respects than those mentioned, nomore and no worse than was to be expected. And Cotton Mather, in the"Magnalia, " vindicates them on this ground:--

 "They consulted the precedents of former times, and precepts laid down by learned writers about witchcraft; as, Keeble on the Common Law, chap. 'Conjuration' (an author approved by the twelve judges of our nation): also, Sir Matthew Hale's Trials of Witches, printed anno 1682; Glanvill's Collection of Sundry Trials in England and Ireland in the years 1658, '61, '63, '64, and '81; Bernard's Guide to Jury-men; Baxter's and R. B. , their histories about Witches, and their Discoveries; Cotton Mather's Memorable Providences relating to Witchcraft, printed 1685. "

So far as the medical profession at the time is concerned, it must beadmitted that they bear a full share of responsibility for theproceedings. They gave countenance and currency to the idea ofwitchcraft in the public mind, and were very generally in the habit, when a patient did not do well under their prescriptions, of gettingrid of all difficulty by saying that "an evil hand" was upon him. Their opinion to this effect is cited throughout, and appears in alarge number of the documents. There were coroners' juries in caseswhere it was suspected that a person died of witchcraft. It is muchto be regretted that none of their verdicts have been preserved. Drawnup by an attending "chirurgeon, " they would illustrate the state ofprofessional science at that day, by informing us of the marks, indications, and conditions of the bodily organization by which thetraces of the Devil's hand were believed to be discoverable. All weknow is that, in particular cases, as that of Bray Wilkins's grandsonDaniel, the jury found decisive proof that he had died by "an evilhand. "

It is not to be denied or concealed, that the clergy were instrumentalin bringing on the witchcraft delusion in 1692. As the supposed agentsof the mischief belonged to the supernatural and spiritual world, which has ever been considered their peculiar province, it was thoughtthat the advice and co-operation of ministers were particularlyappropriate and necessary. Opposition to prevailing vices and attemptsto reform society were considered at that time in the light of aconflict with Satan himself; and he was thought to be the ablestminister who had the greatest power over the invisible enemy, andcould most easily and effectively avert his blows, and counteract hisbaleful influence. This gave the clergy the front in the battleagainst the hosts of Belial. They were proud of the position, and werestimulated to distinguish themselves in the conflict. Cotton Matherrepresents that ministers were honored by the special hostility of thegreat enemy of souls, "more dogged by the Devil than any other men, "just as, according to his philosophy, the lightning struck thesteeples of churches more frequently than other buildings because thePrince of the Power of the Air particularly hated the places where thesound of the gospel was heard. There were, moreover, it is to befeared, ministers whose ambition to acquire influence and power hadbeen allowed to become a ruling principle, and who favored thedelusion because thereby their object could be most surely achieved bycarrying the people to the greatest extremes of credulity, superstition, and fanatical blindness. 

But justice requires it to be said that the ministers, as a generalthing, did not take the lead after the proceedings had assumed theirmost violent aspect, and the disastrous effects been fully brought toview. It may be said, on the contrary, that they took the lead, as aclass, in checking the delusion, and rescuing the public mind from itscontrol. Prior to the time when they were called upon to give theiradvice to the government, they probably followed Cotton Mather: afterthat, they seemed to have freed themselves generally from hisinfluence. The names of Dane and Barnard of Andover, Higginson ofSalem, Cheever of Marblehead, Hubbard and Wise of Ipswich, Payson andPhillips of Rowley, Allin of Salisbury, and Capen of Topsfield, appearin behalf of persons accused. To come forward in their defence showscourage, and proves that their influence was in the right direction, even while the proceedings were at their height. Mr. Hale, of Beverly, abandoned the prosecutions, and expressed his disapprobation of them, before the government or the Court relaxed the vigor of theiroperations, as is sufficiently proved by the fact that the "afflictedchildren" cried out against his wife. Willard, and James Allen, andMoody, and John Bailey, and even Increase Mather, of Boston, openlydiscountenanced the course things were taking. The latter circulated aletter from his London correspondent, a person whose opinion wasentitled to weight, condemning in the strongest terms the doctrine ofthe chief-justice, as follows: "All that I speak with much wonder thatany man, much less a man of such abilities, learning, and experienceas Mr. Stoughton, should take up a persuasion that the Devil cannotassume the likeness of an innocent, to afflict another person. In myopinion, it is a persuasion utterly destitute of any solid reason torender it so much as probable. " The ministers may have been among thefirst to bring on the delusion; but the foregoing facts prove, that, as a profession, they were the first to attempt to check anddiscountenance the prosecutions. While we are required, in allfairness, to give this credit to the clergy in general, it would befalse to the obligations of historical truth and justice to attempt topalliate the conduct of some of them. Whoever considers all that Mr. Parris, according to his own account, said and did, cannot but shrinkfrom the necessity of passing judgment upon him, and find relief inleaving him to that tribunal which alone can measure the extent ofhuman responsibility, and sound the depths of the heart. Lawson threwinto the conflagration all the combustible materials his eloquence andtalents, heated, it is to be feared, by resentment, could contribute. Dr. Bentley, in his "Description and History of Salem" (Mass. Hist. Coll. , 1st series, vol. Vi. ) says, "Mr. Noyes came out and publiclyconfessed his error, never concealed a circumstance, never excusedhimself; visited, loved, blessed, the survivors whom he had injured;asked forgiveness always, and consecrated the residue of his life tobless mankind. " It is to be hoped that the statement is correct. Therewere several points of agreement between Noyes and Bentley. Both weremen of ability and learning. Like Bentley, Noyes lived and died abachelor; and, like him, was a man of lively and active temperament, and, in the general tenor of his life, benevolent and disinterested. Perhaps congeniality in these points led Bentley to make thestatement, just quoted, a little too strong. He wrote more than acentury after the witchcraft proceedings; just at that point whentradition had become inflated by all manner of current talk, of fablemixed with fact, before the correcting and expunging hand of a severescrutiny of records and documents had commenced its work. The drag-netof time had drawn along with it every thing that anybody had said; butthe process of sifting and discrimination had not begun. His kindlyand ingenuous nature led him to believe, and prompted him to writedown, all that was amiable, and pleasing to a mind like his. So far asthe records and documents give us information, there is reason toapprehend, that Mr. Noyes, like Stoughton, another old bachelor, neverrecovered his mind from the frame of feeling or conviction in which itwas during the proceedings. His name is not found, as are those ofother ministers, to any petitions, memorials or certificates, in favorof the sufferers during the trials, or of reparation to their memoriesor to the feelings of their friends. He does not appear to have takenany part in arresting the delusion or rectifying the public mind. 

Of Cotton Mather, more is required to be said. He aspired to beconsidered the leading champion of the Church, and the most successfulcombatant against the Satanic powers. He seems to have longed for anopportunity to signalize himself in this particular kind of warfare;seized upon every occurrence that would admit of such a coloring torepresent it as the result of diabolical agency; circulated in hisnumerous publications as many tales of witchcraft as he could collectthroughout New and Old England, and repeatedly endeavored to get upcases of the kind in Boston. There is some ground for suspicion thathe was instrumental in originating the fanaticism in Salem; at anyrate, he took a leading part in fomenting it. And while there isevidence that he endeavored, after the delusion subsided, to escapethe disgrace of having approved of the proceedings, and pretended tohave been in some measure opposed to them, it can be too clearly shownthat he was secretly and cunningly endeavoring to renew them duringthe next year in his own parish in Boston. [A]

[Footnote A: I know nothing more artful and jesuitical than hisattempts to avoid the reproach of having been active in carrying onthe delusion in Salem and elsewhere, and, at the same time, to keep upsuch a degree of credulity and superstition in the minds of the peopleas to render it easy to plunge them into it again at the firstfavorable moment. In the following passages, he endeavors to escapethe odium that had been connected with the prosecutions:--

"The world knows how many pages I have composed and published, andparticular gentlemen in the government know how many letters I havewritten, to prevent the excessive credit of spectral accusations. 

"In short, I do humbly but freely affirm it, that there is not a manliving in this world, who has been more desirous than the poor man Ito shelter my neighbors from the inconveniences of spectral outcries:yea, I am very jealous I have done so much that way as to sin in whatI have done; such have been the cowardice and fearfulness whereunto myregard unto the dissatisfaction of other people has precipitated me. Iknow a man in the world, who has thought he has been able to convictsome such witches as ought to die; but his respect unto the publicpeace has caused him rather to try whether he could not renew them byrepentance. "

In his Life of Sir William Phips, he endeavors to take the credit tohimself of having doubted the propriety of the proceedings while theywere in progress. This work was published without his name, in orderthat he might commend himself with more freedom. The advice given bythe ministers of Boston and the vicinity to the government has beenspoken of. Cotton Mather frequently took occasion to applaud andmagnify the merit of this production. In one of his writings, hespeaks of "the gracious words" it contained. In his Life of Phips, hethus modestly takes the credit of its authorship to himself: it was"drawn up, at their (the ministers') desire, by Mr. Mather theyounger, as I have been informed. " And, in order the more effectuallyto give the impression that he was rather opposed to the proceedings, he quotes those portions of the paper which recommended caution andcircumspection, leaving out those other passages in which it wasvehemently urged to carry the proceedings on "speedily andvigorously. "

This single circumstance is decisive of the disingenuity of Dr. Mather. As it was the purpose of the government, in requesting theadvice of the ministers, to ascertain their opinion of the expediencyof continuing the prosecutions, it was a complete and deliberateperversion and falsification of their answer to omit the passageswhich encouraged the proceedings, and to record those only whichrecommended caution and circumspection. The object of Mather insuppressing the important parts of the document has, however, in somemeasure been answered. As the "Magnalia, " within which his Life ofPhips is embraced, is the usual and popular source of information andreference respecting the topics of which it treats, the opinion hasprevailed, that the Boston ministers, especially "Mr. Mather theyounger, " endeavored to prevent the transactions connected with thetrial and execution of the supposed witches. Unfortunately, however, for the reputation of Cotton Mather, Hutchinson has preserved theaddress of the ministers entire: and it appears that they approved, applauded, and stimulated the prosecutions; and that the people ofSalem and the surrounding country were the victims of a delusion, theprincipal promoters of which have, to a great degree, been shelteredfrom reproach by the dishonest artifice, which has now been exposed. 

But, like other ambitious and grasping politicians, he was anxious tohave the support of all parties at the same time. After making courtto those who were dissatisfied with the prosecutions, he thus commendshimself to all who approved of them:--

"And why, after all my unwearied cares and pains to rescue themiserable from the lions and bears of hell which had seized them, andafter all my studies to disappoint the devils in their designs toconfound my neighborhood, must I be driven to the necessity of anapology? Truly, the hard representations wherewith some ill men havereviled my conduct, and the countenance which other men have given tothese representations, oblige me to give mankind some account of mybehavior. No Christian can (I say none but evil-workers can) criminatemy visiting such of my poor flock as have at any time fallen under theterrible and sensible molestations of evil angels. Let theirafflictions have been what they will, I could not have answered itunto my glorious Lord, if I had withheld my just comforts and counselsfrom them; and, if I have also, with some exactness, observed themethods of the invisible world, when they have thus become observable, I have been but a servant of mankind in doing so: yea, no less aperson than the venerable Baxter has more than once or twice, in themost public manner, invited mankind to thank me for that service. "

In other passages, he thus continues to stimulate and encourage theadvocates of the prosecutions:--

"Wherefore, instead of all apish shouts and jeers at histories whichhave such undoubted confirmation as that no man that has breedingenough to regard the common laws of human society will offer to doubtof them, it becomes us rather to adore the goodness of God, who doesnot permit such things every day to befall us all, as he sometimes didpermit to befall some few of our miserable neighbors. 

"And it is a very glorious thing that I have now to mention: Thedevils have, with most horrid operations, broke in upon ourneighborhood; and God has at such a rate overruled all the fury andmalice of those devils, that all the afflicted have not only beendelivered, but, I hope, also savingly brought home unto God; and thereputation of no one good person in the world has been damaged, but, instead thereof, the souls of many, especially of the risinggeneration, have been thereby awakened unto some acquaintance withreligion. Our young people, who belonged unto the praying-meetings, ofboth sexes, apart, would ordinarily spend whole nights, by whole weekstogether, in prayers and psalms upon these occasions, in whichdevotions the devils could get nothing but, like fools, a scourge fortheir own backs: and some scores of other young people, who werestrangers to real piety, were now struck with the livelydemonstrations of hell evidently set forth before their eyes, whenthey saw persons cruelly frighted, wounded and starved by devils, andscalded with burning brimstone, and yet so preserved in this torturedstate, as that, at the end of one month's wretchedness, they were asable still to undergo another; so that, of these also, it might now besaid, 'Behold, they pray. ' In the whole, the Devil got just nothing, but God got praises, Christ got subjects, the Holy Spirit got temples, the church got additions, and the souls of men got everlastingbenefits. I am not so vain as to say that any wisdom or virtue of minedid contribute unto this good order of things; but I am so just as tosay, I did not hinder this good. "

I cannot, indeed, resist the conviction, that, notwithstanding all hisattempts to appear dissatisfied, after they had become unpopular, withthe occurrences in the Salem trials, he looked upon them with secretpleasure, and would have been glad to have had them repeated inBoston. ]

How blind is man to the future! The state of things which CottonMather labored to bring about, in order that he might increase his owninfluence over an infatuated people, by being regarded by them asmighty to cast out and vanquish evil spirits, and as able to holdSatan himself in chains by his prayers and his piety, brought him atlength into such disgrace that his power was broken down, and hebecame the object of public ridicule and open insult. And theexcitement that had been produced for the purpose of restoring andstrengthening the influence of the clerical and spiritual leadersresulted in effects which reduced that influence to a still lowerpoint. The intimate connection of Dr. Mather and other prominentministers with the witchcraft delusion brought a reproach upon theclergy from which they have not yet recovered. 

In addition to the designing exertions of ambitious ecclesiastics, andthe benevolent and praiseworthy efforts of those whose only aim was topromote a real and thorough reformation of religion, all the passionsof our nature stood ready to throw their concentrated energy into theexcitement (as they are sure to do, whatever may be its character), sosoon as it became sufficiently strong to encourage their action. 

The whole force of popular superstition, all the fanaticalpropensities of the ignorant and deluded multitude, united with thebest feelings of our nature to heighten the fury of the storm. Pietywas indignant at the supposed rebellion against the sovereignty ofGod, and was roused to an extreme of agitation and apprehension inwitnessing such a daring and fierce assault by the Devil and hisadherents upon the churches and the cause of the gospel. Virtue wasshocked at the tremendous guilt of those who were believed to haveentered the diabolical confederacy; while public order and securitystood aghast, amidst the invisible, the supernatural, the infernal, and apparently the irresistible attacks that were making upon thefoundations of society. In baleful combination with principles, goodin themselves, thus urging the passions into wild operation, therewere all the wicked and violent affections to which humanity isliable. Theological bitterness, personal animosities, localcontroversies, private feuds, long-cherished grudges, and professionaljealousies, rushed forward, and raised their discordant voices, toswell the horrible din; credulity rose with its monstrous andever-expanding form, on the ruins of truth, reason, and the senses;malignity and cruelty rode triumphant through the storm, by whose furyevery mild and gentle sentiment had been shipwrecked; and revenge, smiling in the midst of the tempest, welcomed its desolating wrath asit dashed the mangled objects of its hate along the shore. 

The treatment of the prisoners, by the administrative and subordinateofficers in charge of them, there is reason to apprehend, was morethan ordinarily harsh and unfeeling. The fate of Willard preventedexpressions of kindness towards them. The crime of which they wereaccused put them outside of the pale of human charities. All whobelieved them guilty looked upon them, not only with horror, but hate. To have deliberately abandoned God and heaven, the salvation of Christand the brotherhood of man, was regarded as detestable, execrable, andutterly and for ever damnable. This was the universal feeling at thetime when the fanaticism was at its height; or, if there were anydissenters, they dared not show themselves. What the poor innocentsufferers experienced of cruelty, wrong, and outrage from this cause, it is impossible for words to tell. It left them in prison to neglect, ignominious ill-treatment, and abusive language from the menialshaving charge of them; it made their trials a brutal mockery; it madethe pathway to the gallows a series of insults from an exasperatedmob. If dear relatives or faithful friends kept near them, they did itat the peril of their lives, and were forbidden to utter thesentiments with which their hearts were breaking. There was nosympathy for those who died, or for those who mourned. 

It may seem strange to us, at this distance of time, and with theintelligence prevalent in this age, that persons of such known, established, and eminent reputation as many of those whose cases havebeen particularly noticed, could possibly have been imagined guiltyof the crime imputed to them. The question arises in every mind, Whydid not their characters save them from conviction, and even fromsuspicion? The answer is to be found in the peculiar views thenentertained of the power and agency of Satan. It was believed that itwould be one of the signs of his coming to destroy the Church ofChrist, that some of the "elect" would be seduced into hisservice, --that he would drag captive in his chains, and pervert intoinstruments to further his wicked cause, many who stood among thehighest in the confidence of Christians. This belief made them morevehement in their proceedings against ministers, church-members, andpersons of good repute, who were proved, by the overwhelming evidenceof the "afflicted children" and the confessing witches, to have made acompact with the Devil. There is reason to fear that Mr. Burroughs, and all accused persons of the highest reputation before for piety andworth, especially all who had been professors of religion andaccredited church-members, suffered more than others from the severityof the judges and executive officers of the law, and from the rage andhatred of the people. It was indeed necessary, in order to keep up thedelusion and maintain the authority of the prosecutions, to break downthe influence of those among the accused and the sufferers who hadstood the highest, and bore themselves the best through the fieryordeal of the examinations, trials, and executions. 

It is indeed a very remarkable fact, which has justly been enlargedupon by several who have had their attention turned to this subject, that, of the whole number that suffered, none, in the final scene, lost their fortitude for a moment. Many were quite aged; a majority, women, of whom some, brought up in delicacy, were wholly unused torough treatment or physical suffering. They must have undergone themost dreadful hardships, suddenly snatched from their families andhomes; exposed to a torrent of false accusations imputing to them themost odious, shameful, and devilish crimes; made objects of theabhorrence of their neighbors, and, through the notoriety of theaffair, of the world; carried to and fro, over rugged roads, from jailto jail, too often by unfeeling sub-officials; immured in crowded, filthy, and noisome prisons; heavily loaded with chains, in dungeons;left to endure insufficient attention to necessary personal wants, often with inadequate food and clothing; all expressions of sympathyfor them withheld and forbidden, --those who ought to have been theircomforters denouncing them in the most awful language, and consigningthem to the doom of excommunication from the church on earth and fromthe hope of heaven. Surely, there have been few cases in the dark andmournful annals of human suffering and wrong, few instances of "man'sinhumanity to man, " to be compared with what the victims of thistragedy endured. Their bearing through the whole, from the arrest tothe scaffold, reflects credit upon our common nature. The fact thatWardwell lost his firmness, for a time, ought not to exclude his namefrom the honored list. Its claim to be enrolled on it was noblyretrieved by his recantation, and his manly death. 

There is one consideration that imparts a higher character to thedeportment of these persons than almost any of the tests to which thefirmness of the mind of man has ever been exposed. There was nothingoutside of the mind to hold it up, but every thing to bear it down. All that they had in this world, all on which they could rest a hopefor the next, was the consciousness of their innocence. Their fidelityto this sense of innocence--for a lie would have saved them--theirunfaltering allegiance to this consciousness; the preservation of acalm, steadfast, serene mind; their faith and their prayers, risingabove the maledictions of a maniac mob, in devotion to God andforgiveness to men, and, as in the case of Martha Corey and GeorgeBurroughs, in clear and collected expressions, --this was trulysublime. It was appreciated, at the time, by many a heart melted backto its humanity; and paved the way for the deliverance of the world, we trust for ever, from all such delusions, horrors, and spectacles. The sufferers in 1692 deserve to be held in grateful remembrance forhaving illustrated the dignity of which our nature is capable; forhaving shown that integrity of conscience is an armor which protectsthe peace of the soul against all the powers that can assail it; andfor having given an example, that will be seen of all and in alltimes, of a courage, constancy, and faithfulness of which all arecapable, and which can give the victory over infirmities of age, weaknesses and pains of body, and the most appalling combination ofoutrages to the mind and heart that can be accumulated by the violenceand the wrath of man. Superstition and ignorance consigned their namesto obloquy, and shrouded them in darkness. But the day has dawned; theshadows are passing away; truth has risen; the reign of superstitionis over; and justice will be done to all who have been true tothemselves, and stood fast to the integrity of their souls, even tothe death. 

The place selected for the executions is worthy of notice. It was at aconsiderable distance from the jail, and could be reached only by acircuitous and difficult route. It is a fatiguing enterprise to get atit now, although many passages that approach it from some directionshave since been opened. But it was a point where the spectacle wouldbe witnessed by the whole surrounding country far and near, being onthe brow of the highest eminence in the vicinity of the town. As itwas believed by the people generally that they were engaged in a greatbattle with Satan, one of whose titles was "the Prince of the Power ofthe Air, " perhaps they chose that spot to execute his confederates, because, in going to that high point, they were flaunting him in hisface, celebrating their triumph over him in his own realm. There is nocontemporaneous nor immediately subsequent record, that theexecutions took place on the spot assigned by tradition; but thattradition has been uniform and continuous, and appears to be verifiedby a singular item of evidence that has recently come to light. Aletter written by the late venerable Dr. Holyoke to a friend at adistance, dated Salem, Nov. 25, 1791, has found its way back to thepossession of one of his grand-daughters, which contains the followingpassage: "In the last month, there died a man in this town, by thename of John Symonds, aged a hundred years lacking about six months, having been born in the famous '92. He has told me that his nurse hadoften told him, that, while she was attending his mother at the timeshe lay in with him, she saw, from the chamber windows, those unhappypeople hanging on Gallows' Hill, who were executed for witches by thedelusion of the times. " John Symonds lived and died near the southernend of Beverly Bridge, on the south side of what is now Bridge Street. He was buried from his house, and Dr. Bentley made the funeral prayer, in which he is said to have used this language: "O God! the man whowith his own hands felled the trees, and hewed the timbers, anderected the house in which we are now assembled, was the ancestor ofhim whose remains we are about to inter. " It is inferrible from thisthat Symonds was born in the house from which he was buried. GallowsHill, now "Witch Hill" is in full view from that spot, and would befrom the chamber windows of a house there, at any time, even in theseason when intervening trees were in their fullest foliage, while noother point in that direction would be discernible. From the onlyother locality of persons of the name of Symonds, at that time, inNorth Fields near the North Bridge, Witch Hill is also visible, andthe only point in that direction that then would have been. 

"Witch Hill" is a part of an elevated ledge of rock on the westernside of the city of Salem, broken at intervals; beginning at Legg'sHill, and trending northerly. The turnpike from Boston enters Salemthrough one of the gaps in this ridge, which has been widened, deepened, and graded. North of the turnpike, it rises abruptly to aconsiderable elevation, called "Norman's Rocks. " At a distance ofbetween three and four hundred feet, it sinks again, making a wide anddeep gulley; and then, about a third of a mile from the turnpike, itre-appears, in a precipitous and, at its extremity, inaccessiblecliff, of the height of fifty or sixty feet. Its southern and westernaspect, as seen from the rough land north of the turnpike, is given inthe headpiece of the Third Part, at the beginning of this volume. Itssombre and desolate appearance admits of little variety ofdelineation. It is mostly a bare and naked ledge. At the top of thiscliff, on the southern brow of the eminence, the executions aresupposed to have taken place. The outline rises a little towards thenorth, but soon begins to fall off to the general level of thecountry. From that direction only can the spot be easily reached. Itis hard to climb the western side, impossible to clamber up thesouthern face. Settlement creeps down from the north, and haspartially ascended the eastern acclivity, but can never reach thebrink. Scattered patches of soil are too thin to tempt cultivation, and the rock is too craggy and steep to allow occupation. An activeand flourishing manufacturing industry crowds up to its base; but aconsiderable surface at the top will for ever remain an open space. Itis, as it were, a platform raised high in air. 

A magnificent panorama of ocean, island, headland, bay, river, town, field, and forest spreads out and around to view. On a clear summerday, the picture can scarcely be surpassed. Facing the sun and thesea, and the evidences of the love and bounty of Providence shiningover the landscape, the last look of earth must have suggested to thesufferers a wide contrast between the mercy of the Creator and thewrath of his creatures. They beheld the face of the blessed Godshining upon them in his works, and they passed with renewed andassured faith into his more immediate presence. The elevated rock, uplifted by the divine hand, will stand while the world stands, inbold relief, and can never be obscured by the encroachments of societyor the structures of art, --a fitting memorial of their constancy. 

When, in some coming day, a sense of justice, appreciation of moralfirmness, sympathy for suffering innocence, the diffusion of refinedsensibility, a discriminating discernment of what is really worthy ofcommemoration among men, a rectified taste, a generous public spirit, and gratitude for the light that surrounds and protects us againsterror, folly, and fanaticism, shall demand the rearing of a suitablemonument to the memory of those who in 1692 preferred death to afalsehood, the pedestal for the lofty column will be found ready, reared by the Creator on a foundation that can never be shaken whilethe globe endures, or worn away by the elements, man, or time--thebrow of Witch Hill. On no other spot could such a tribute be moreworthily bestowed, or more conspicuously displayed. 

The effects of the delusion upon the country at large were verydisastrous. It cast its shadows over a broad surface, and theydarkened the condition of generations. The material interests of thepeople long felt its blight. Breaking out at the opening of theseason, it interrupted the planting and cultivating of the grounds. Itstruck an entire summer out of one year, and broke in upon another. The fields were neglected; fences, roads, barns, and even themeeting-house, went into disrepair. Burdens were accumulated upon thealready over-taxed resources of the people. An actual scarcity ofprovisions, amounting almost to a famine, continued for some time topress upon families. Farms were brought under mortgage or sacrificed, and large numbers of the people were dispersed. One locality in thevillage, which was the scene of this wild and tragic fanaticism, bearsto this day the marks of the blight then brought upon it. Although inthe centre of a town exceeding almost all others in its agriculturaldevelopment and thrift, --every acre elsewhere showing the touch ofmodern improvement and culture, --the "old meeting-house road, " fromthe crossing of the Essex Railroad to the point where it meets theroad leading north from Tapleyville, has to-day a singular appearanceof abandonment. The Surveyor of Highways ignores it. The old, gray, moss-covered stone walls are dilapidated, and thrown out of line. Nota house is on either of its borders, and no gate opens or path leadsto any. Neglect and desertion brood over the contiguous grounds. Indeed, there is but one house standing directly on the roadside untilyou reach the vicinity of the site of the old meeting-house; and thatis owned and occupied by a family that bear the name and are thedirect descendants of Rebecca Nurse. On both sides there are theremains of cellars, which declare that once it was lined by aconsiderable population. Along this road crowds thronged in 1692, forweeks and months, to witness the examinations. 

The ruinous results were not confined to the village, but extendedmore or less over the country generally. Excitement, wrought up toconsternation, spread everywhere. People left their business andfamilies, and came from distant points, to gratify their curiosity, and enable themselves to form a judgment of the character of thephenomena here exhibited. Strangers from all parts swelled theconcourse, gathered to behold the sufferings of "the afflicted" asmanifested at the examinations; and flocked to the surroundingeminences and the grounds immediately in front of Witch Hill, to catcha view of the convicts as they approached the place selected for theirexecution, offered their dying prayers, and hung suspended high inair. Such scenes always draw together great multitudes. None havepossessed a deeper, stronger, or stranger attraction; and never hasthe dread spectacle been held out to view over a wider area, or fromso conspicuous a spot. The assembling of such multitudes so often, forsuch a length of time, and from such remote quarters, must have beenaccompanied and followed by wasteful, and in all respects deleterious, effects. The continuous or frequently repeated sessions of themagistrates, grand jury, and jury of trials; and the attendance ofwitnesses summoned from other towns, or brought from beyond thejurisdiction of the Province, and of families and parties interestedspecially in the proceedings, --must have occasioned an extensive andprotracted interruption of the necessary industrial pursuits ofsociety, and heavily increased the public burdens. 

The destruction dealt upon particular families extended to so many asto constitute in the aggregate a vast, wide-spread calamity. [A]

[Footnote A: The following is a statement of the loss inflicted uponthe estate of George Jacobs, Sr. The property of the son was utterlydestroyed. 

 "_An Account of what was seized and taken away from my Father's Estate, George Jacobs, Sr. , late of Salem, deceased, by Sheriff Corwin and his Assistants in the year 1692. _

 "When my said father was executed, and I was forced to fly out of the country, to my great damage and distress of my family, my wife and daughter imprisoned, --viz. , my wife eleven months, and my daughter seven months in prison, --it cost them twelve pounds money to the officers, besides other charges. 

Five cows, fair large cattle, £3 per cow £15 00 0Eight loads of English hay taken out of the barn, 35_s. _ per load 14 0 0A parcel of apples that made 24 barrels cider to halves; viz. , 12 barrels cider, 8_s. _ per barrel 4 16 0Sixty bushels of Indian corn, 2_s. _ 6_d. _ per bushel 7 10 0A mare 2 0 0Two good feather beds, and furniture, rugs, blankets, sheets, bolsters and pillows 10 0 0Two brass kettles, cost 6 0 0Money, 12_s. _; a large gold thumb ring, 20_s. _ 1 12 0Five swine 3 15 0A quantity of pewter which I cannot exactly know the worth, perhaps 3 0 0 ------- 67 13 0Besides abundance of small things, meat in the house, fowls, chairs, and other things took clear away _above_ 12 0 0 ------- 79 13 0 =======

 "GEORGE JACOBS. "

When Edward Bishop and his wife Sarah were arrested, household goodswhich were valued by the sheriff himself at ten pounds, --he refusingthat sum for their restitution, --six cows, twenty-four swine, forty-six sheep, were taken from his farm. The imprisonment of himselfand wife (prior to their escape) aggregated thirty-seven weeks. Tenshillings a week for board, and other charges and prison feesamounting to five pounds, were assessed upon his estate, and taken bydistraint. A family of twelve children was left without any to director care for them, and the product of the farm for that year wholly cutoff. 

There were taken from the estate of Samuel Wardwell, who was executed, five cows, a heifer and yearling, a horse, nine hogs, eight loads ofhay, six acres of standing corn, and a set of carpenters' tools. Fromthe estate of Dorcas Hoar, a widow, there were taken two cows, an oxand mare, four pigs, bed, bed-curtains and bedding, and otherhousehold stuff. 

Persons apprehended were made to pay all charges of every kind fortheir maintenance, fuel, clothes, expenses of transportation from jailto jail, and inexorable court and prison fees. The usual fee to theclerk of the courts was £1. 17_s. _ 5_d. _, sometimes more; sometimes, although very rarely, a little less. He must have received a largeamount of money in the aggregate that year. The prisoners were chargedfor every paper that was drawn up. If a reprieve was obtained, therewas a fee. When discharged, there was a fee. The expenses of theexecutions, even hangmen's fees, were levied on the families of thesufferers. Abraham Foster, whose mother died in prison, to get herbody for burial, had to pay £2. 10_s. _

When the value of money at that time is considered, and we bear inmind that most of the persons apprehended were farmers, who have butlittle cash on hand, and that these charges were levied on theirstock, crops, and furniture in their absence, and in the unrestrainedexercise of arbitrary will, by the sheriff or constables, we can judgehow utterly ruinous the operation must have been. ]

The facts that belong to the story of the witchcraft delusion of 1692, or that may in any way explain or illustrate it, so far as they can begathered from the imperfect and scattered records and papers that havecome down to us, have now been laid before you. But there are one ortwo inquiries that force themselves upon thoughtful minds, whichdemand consideration before we close the subject. 

What are we to think of those persons who commenced and continued theaccusations, --the "afflicted children" and their associates?

In some instances and to some extent, the steps they took and thetestimony they bore may be explained by referring to the mysteriousenergies of the imagination, the power of enthusiasm, the influence ofsympathy, and the general prevalence of credulity, ignorance, superstition, and fanaticism at the time; and it is not probable, that, when they began, they had any idea of the tremendous length towhich they were finally led on. 

It was perhaps their original design to gratify a love of notoriety orof mischief by creating a sensation and excitement in theirneighborhood, or, at the worst, to wreak their vengeance upon one ortwo individuals who had offended them. They soon, however, becameintoxicated by the terrible success of their imposture, and were sweptalong by the frenzy they had occasioned. It would be much morecongenial with our feelings to believe, that these misguided andwretched young persons early in the proceedings became themselvesvictims of the delusion into which they plunged every one else. But weare forbidden to form this charitable judgment by the manifestationsof art and contrivance, of deliberate cunning and cool malice, theyexhibited to the end. Once or twice they were caught in their ownsnare; and nothing but the blindness of the bewildered community savedthem from disgraceful exposure and well-deserved punishment. Theyappeared as the prosecutors of every poor creature that was tried, andseemed ready to bear testimony against any one upon whom suspicionmight happen to fall. It is dreadful to reflect upon the enormity oftheir wickedness, if they were conscious of imposture throughout. Itseems to transcend the capabilities of human crime. There is, perhaps, a slumbering element in the heart of man, that sleeps for ever in thebosom of the innocent and good, and requires the perpetration of agreat sin to wake it into action, but which, when once aroused, impelsthe transgressor onward with increasing momentum, as the descendingball is accelerated in its course. It may be that crime begets anappetite for crime, which, like all other appetites, is not quietedbut inflamed by gratification. 

Their precise moral condition, the degree of guilt to be ascribed, andthe sentence to be passed upon them, can only be determined by aconsiderate review of all the circumstances and influences aroundthem. 

For a period embracing about two months, they had been in the habit ofmeeting together, and spending the long winter evenings, at Mr. Parris's house, practising the arts of fortune-telling, jugglery, andmagic. What they had heard in the traditions and fables of a credulousand superstitious age, --stories handed down in the interiorsettlements, circulated in companies gathered around the hearths offarmhouses, indulging the excitements of terrified imaginations;filling each other's minds with wondrous tales of second-sight, ghostsand spirits from the unseen world, together with what the West-Indianor South-American slaves could add, --was for a long time the food oftheir fancies. They experimented continually upon what was thespiritualism of their day, and grew familiar with the imagery and theexhibitions of the marvellous. The prevalent notions concerningwitchcraft operations and spectral manifestations came into fulleffect among them. Living in the constant contemplation of suchthings, their minds became inflamed and bewildered; and, at the sametime, they grew expert in practising and exhibiting the forms ofpretended supernaturalism, the conditions of diabolical distraction, and the terrors of demonology. Apparitions rose before them, revealingthe secrets of the past and of the future. They beheld the presentspectres of persons then bodily far distant. They declared inlanguage, fits, dreams, or trance, the immediate operations uponthemselves of the Devil, by the agency of his confederates. Theirsufferings, while thus under "an evil hand, " were dreadful to behold, and soon drew wondering and horror-struck crowds around them. 

At this point, if Mr. Parris, the ministers, and magistrates had donetheir duty, the mischief might have been stopped. The girls ought tohave been rebuked for their dangerous and forbidden sorceries anddivinations, their meetings broken up, and all such tamperings withalleged supernaturalism and spiritualism frowned down. Instead ofthis, the neighboring ministers were summoned to meet at Mr. Parris'shouse to witness the extraordinary doings of the girls, and all theydid was to indorse, and pray over, them. Countenance was thus given totheir pretensions, and the public confidence in the reality of theirstatements established. Magistrates from the town, church-members, leading people, and people of all sorts, flocked to witness the awfulpower of Satan, as displayed in the tortures and contortions of the"afflicted children;" who became objects of wonder, so far as theirfeats were regarded, and of pity in view of their agonies andconvulsions. 

The aspect of the evidence rather favors the supposition, that thegirls originally had no design of accusing, or bringing injury upon, any one. But the ministers at Parris's house, physicians and others, began the work of destruction by pronouncing the opinion that theywere bewitched. This carried with it, according to the receiveddoctrine, a conviction that there were witches about; for the Devilcould not act except through the instrumentality of beings inconfederacy with him. Immediately, the girls were beset by everybodyto say who it was that bewitched them. Yielding to this pressure, theyfirst cried out upon such persons as might have been most naturallysuggested to them, --Sarah Good, apparently without a regular home, andwandering with her children from house to house for shelter andrelief; Sarah Osburn, a melancholy, broken-minded, bed-ridden person;and Tituba, a slave, probably of mixed African and Indian blood. Atthe examination of these persons, the girls were first brought beforethe public, and the awful power in their hands revealed to them. Thesuccess with which they acted their parts; the novelty of the scene;the ceremonials of the occasion, the magistrates in their imposingdignity and authority, the trappings of the marshal and his officers, the forms of proceeding, --all which they had never seen before; thenotice taken of them; the importance attached to them; invested theaffair with a strange fascination in their eyes, and awakened a newclass of sentiments and ideas in their minds. A love of distinctionand notoriety, and the several passions that are gratified by theexpression by others of sympathy, wonder, and admiration, were broughtinto play. The fact that all eyes were upon them, with the specialnotice of the magistrates, and the entire confidence with which theirstatements were received, flattered and beguiled them. A fearfulresponsibility had been assumed, and they were irretrievably committedto their position. While they adhered to that position, their powerwas irresistible, and they were sure of the public sympathy and ofbeing cherished by the public favor. If they faltered, they would bethe objects of universal execration and of the severest penalties oflaw for the wrongs already done and the falsehoods already sworn to. There was no retracing their steps; and their only safety was incontinuing the excitement they had raised. New victims were constantlyrequired to prolong the delusion, fresh fuel to keep up theconflagration; and they went on to cry out upon others. With theexception of two of their number, who appear to have indulged spiteagainst the families in which they were servants, there is no evidencethat they were actuated by private grievances or by animositiespersonal to themselves. They were ready and sure to wreak vengeanceupon any who expressed doubts about the truth of their testimony, orthe propriety of the proceedings; but, beyond this, they were veryindifferent as to whom they should accuse. They were willing, as tothat matter, to follow the suggestions of others, and availedthemselves of all the gossip and slander and unfriendly talk in theirfamilies that reached their ears. It was found, that a hint, with alittle information as to persons, places, and circumstances, conveyedto them by those who had resentments and grudges to gratify, would besufficient for the purpose. There is reason to fear, that there weresome behind them, giving direction to the accusations, and managingthe frightful machinery, all the way through. The persons who wereapprehended had, to a considerable extent, been obnoxious, and subjectto prejudice, in connection with quarrels and controversies related inPart I. , vol. I. They were "Topsfield men, " or the opponents of Bayleyor of Parris, or more or less connected with some other feuds. Asfurther proof that the girls were under the guidance of older heads, it is obvious, that there was, in the order of the proceedings, askilful arrangement of times, sequences, and concurrents, that cannotbe ascribed to them. No novelist or dramatist ever laid his plotdeeper, distributed his characters more artistically, or conductedmore methodically the progress of his story. 

In the mean while, they were becoming every day more perfect in theperformance of their parts; and their imaginative powers, nervousexcitability, and flexibility and rapidity of muscular action, werekept under constant stimulus, and attaining a higher development. Theeffect of these things, so long continued in connection with theperpetual pretence, becoming more or less imbued with the character ofbelief, of their alliance and communion with spiritual beings andmanifestations, may have unsettled, to some extent, their minds. Addedto this, a sense of the horrid consequences of their actions, accumulating with every pang they inflicted, the innocent blood theywere shedding, and the depths of ruin into which they were sinkingthemselves and others, not only demoralized, but to some extent, perhaps, crazed them. It is truly a marvel that their physicalconstitutions did not break down under the exhausting excitements, thecontortions of frame, the force to which the bodily functions weresubjected in trances and fits, and the strain upon all the vitalenergies, protracted through many months. The wonder, however, wouldhave been greater, if the mental and moral balance had not therebybeen disturbed. 

Perpetual conversance with ideas of supernaturalism; daily and nightlycommunications, whether in the form of conscious imposture or honestdelusion, with the spiritual world, continued through a great lengthof time, --as much at least as the exclusive contemplation of any oneidea or class of ideas, --must be allowed to be unsalutary. Whateverkeeps the thoughts wholly apart from the objects of real and naturallife, and absorbs them in abstractions, cannot be favorable to thesoundness of the faculties or the tone of the mind. This mustespecially be the effect, if the subjects thus monopolizing theattention partake of the marvellous and mysterious. When these thingsare considered, and the external circumstances of the occasion, thewild social excitement, the consternation, confusion, and horror, thatwere all crowded and heaped up and kept pressing upon the soul withoutintermission for months, the wonder is, indeed, that not only theaccusers, prosecutors, and sufferers, but the whole people, did notlose their senses. Never was the great boon of life, a sound mind in asound body, more liable to be snatched away from all parties. Thedepositions of Ann Putnam, Sr. , have a tinge of sadness;--amelancholy, sickly mania running through them. Something of the kindis, perhaps, more or less discernible in the depositions of others. 

Let us, then, relieve our common nature from the load of theimputation, that, in its normal state, it is capable of suchinconceivable wickedness, by giving to these wretched persons thebenefit of the supposition that they were more or less deranged. Thisview renders the lesson they present more impressive and alarming. Sinin all cases, when considered by a mind that surveys the whole field, is itself insanity. In the case of these accusers, it was so great asto prove, by its very monstrousness, that it had actually subvertedtheir nature and overthrown their reason. They followed their victimsto the gallows, and jeered, scoffed, insulted them in their dyinghours. Sarah Churchill, according to the testimony of SarahIngersoll, on one occasion came to herself, and manifested thesymptoms of a restored moral consciousness: but it was a temporarygleam, a lucid interval; and she passed back into darkness, continuing, as before, to revel in falsehood, and scatter destructionaround her. With this single exception, there is not the slightestappearance of compunction or reflection among them. On the contrary, they seem to have been in a frivolous, sportive, gay frame of thoughtand spirits. There is, perhaps, in this view of their conduct anddemeanor, something to justify the belief that they were reallydemented. The fact that a large amount of skilful art and adroitcunning was displayed by them is not inconsistent with the suppositionthat they had become partially insane; for such cunning and art areoften associated with insanity. 

The quick wit and ready expedients of the "afflicted children" arevery remarkable. They were prompt with answers, if any attempted tocross-examine them, extricated themselves most ingeniously if everbrought into embarrassment, and eluded all efforts to entrap or exposethem. Among the papers is a deposition, the use of which at the trialsis not apparent. It does not purport to bear upon any particular case. Joseph Hutchinson was a firm-minded man, of strong common sense. Hecould not easily be deceived; and, although he took part in theproceedings at the beginning, soon became opposed to them. It looks asif, by close questions put to the child, Abigail Williams, on someoccasion of his casually meeting her, he had tried to expose thefalseness of her accusations, and that he was made to put theconversation into the shape of a deposition. It is as follows:--

 "THE DEPOSITION OF JOSEPH HUTCHINSON, aged fifty-nine years, do testify as followeth: "Abigail Williams, I have heard you speak often of a book that has been offered to you. She said that there were two books: one was a short, thick book; and the other was a long book. I asked her what color the book was of. She said the books were as red as blood. I asked her if she had seen the books opened. She said she had seen it many times. I asked her if she did see any writing in the book. She said there were many lines written; and, at the end of every line, there was a seal. I asked her, who brought the book to her. She told me that it was the black man. I asked her who the black man was. She told me it was the Devil. I asked her if she was not afraid to see the Devil. She said, at the first she was, and did go from him; but now she was not afraid, but could talk with him as well as she could with me. "

There is an air of ease and confidence in the answers of Abigail, which illustrates the promptness of invention and assurance of theirgrounds which the girls manifested on all occasions. They were neverat a loss, and challenged scrutiny. Hutchinson gained no advantage, and no one else ever did, in an encounter with them. 

Whatever opinion may be formed of the moral or mental condition of the"afflicted children, " as to their sanity and responsibility, there canbe no doubt that they were great actors. In mere jugglery and sleightof hand, they bear no mean comparison with the workers of wonders, inthat line, of our own day. Long practice had given them completecontrol over their countenances, intonations of voice, and the entiremuscular and nervous organization of their bodies; so that they couldat will, and on the instant, go into fits and convulsions, swoon andfall to the floor, put their frames into strange contortions, bringthe blood to the face, and send it back again. They could be deadlypale at one moment, at the next flushed; their hands would be clenchedand held together as with a vice; their limbs stiff and rigid orwholly relaxed; their teeth would be set; they would go through theparoxysms of choking and strangulation, and gasp for breath, bringingfroth and blood from the mouth; they would utter all sorts of screamsin unearthly tones; their eyes remain fixed, sometimes bereft of alllight and expression, cold and stony, and sometimes kindled intoflames of passion; they would pass into the state of somnambulism, without aim or conscious direction in their movements, looking at somepoint, where was no apparent object of vision, with a wild, unmeaningglare. There are some indications that they had acquired the art ofventriloquism; or they so wrought upon the imaginations of thebeholders, that the sounds of the motions and voices of invisiblebeings were believed to be heard. They would start, tremble, and bepallid before apparitions, seen, of course, only by themselves; buttheir acting was so perfect that all present thought they saw themtoo. They would address and hold colloquy with spectres and ghosts;and the responses of the unseen beings would be audible to the fancyof the bewildered crowd. They would follow with their eyes the airyvisions, so that others imagined they also beheld them. This wassurely a high dramatic achievement. Their representations of pain, andevery form and all the signs and marks of bodily suffering, --as in thecase of Ann Putnam's arm, and the indentations of teeth on the fleshin many instances, --utterly deceived everybody; and there were menpresent who could not easily have been imposed upon. TheAttorney-general was a barrister fresh from Inns of Court in London. Deodat Lawson had seen something of the world; so had Joseph Herrick. Joseph Hutchinson was a sharp, stern, and sceptical observer. JohnPutnam was a man of great practical force and discrimination; so washis brother Nathaniel, and others of the village. Besides, there weremany from Boston and elsewhere competent to detect a trick; but nonecould discover any imposture in the girls. Sarah Nurse swore that shesaw Goody Bibber cheat in the matter of the pins; but Bibber did notbelong to the village, and was a bungling interloper. The accusinggirls showed extraordinary skill, ingenuity, and fancy in inventingthe stories to which they testified, and seemed to have been familiarwith the imagery which belonged to the literature of demonology. Thishas led some to suppose that they must have had access to bookstreating the subject. Our fathers abhorred, with a perfect hatred, alltheatrical exhibitions. It would have filled them with horror topropose going to a play. But unwittingly, week after week, month inand month out, ministers, deacons, brethren, and sisters of the churchrushed to Nathaniel Ingersoll's, to the village and townmeeting-houses, and to Thomas Beadle's Globe Tavern, and gazed withwonder, awe, and admiration upon acting such as has seldom beensurpassed on the boards of any theatre, high or low, ancient ormodern. 

There is another aspect that perplexes and confounds the judgments ofall who read the story. It is this: As it is at present the universalopinion that the whole of this witchcraft transaction was a delusion, having no foundation whatever but in the imaginations and passions;and as it is now certain, that all the accused, both the condemned andthe pardoned, were entirely innocent, --how can it be explained that somany were led to confess themselves guilty? The answer to thisquestion is to be found in those general principles which have led thewisest legislators and jurists to the conclusion, that, although ontheir face and at first thought, they appear to be the very best kindof evidence, yet, maturely considered, confessions made under the hopeof a benefit, and sometime even without the impulses of such a hope, are to be received with great caution and wariness. Here werefifty-five persons, who declared themselves guilty of a capital, nay, a diabolical crime, of which we know they were innocent. It isprobable that the motive of self-preservation influenced most of them. An awful death was in immediate prospect. There was no escape fromthe wiles of the accusers. The delusion had obtained full possessionof the people, the jury, and the Court. By acknowledging a compactwith Satan, they could in a moment secure their lives and liberty. Itwas a position which only the firmest minds could safely occupy. Theprinciples and the prowess of ordinary characters could not withstandthe temptation and the pressure. They yielded, and were saved from animpending and terrible death. 

As these confessions had a decisive effect in precipitating the publicmind into the depths of its delusion, gave a fatal power to theaccusers, and carried the proceedings to the horrible extremitieswhich have concentrated upon them the attention of the world, theyassume an importance in the history of the affair that demands a fulland thorough exposition. At the examination of Ann Foster, at SalemVillage, on the 15th of July, 1692, the following confession was, "after a while, " extorted from her. It was undoubtedly the result ofthe overwhelming effect of the horrors of her condition upon adistressed and half-crazed mind. It shows the staple materials ofwhich confessions were made, and the forms of absurd superstition withwhich the imaginations of people were then filled:--

 The Devil appeared to her in the shape of a bird at several times, --such a bird as she never saw the like before; and she had had this gift (viz. , of striking the afflicted down with her eye) ever since. Being asked why she thought that bird was the Devil, she answered, because he came white and vanished away black; and that the Devil told her she should have this gift, and that she must believe him, and told her she should have prosperity: and she said that he had appeared to her three times, and always as a bird, and the last time about half a year since, and sat upon a table, --had two legs and great eyes, and that it was the second time of his appearance that he promised her prosperity. She further stated, that it was Goody Carrier that made her a witch. She told her, that, if she would not be a witch, the Devil would tear her to pieces, and carry her away, --at which time she promised to serve the Devil; that she was at the meeting of the witches at Salem Village; that Goody Carrier came, and told her of the meeting, and would have her go: so they got upon sticks, and went said journey, and, being there, did see Mr. Burroughs, the minister, who spake to them all; that there were then twenty-five persons met together; that she tied a knot in a rag, and threw it into the fire to hurt Timothy Swan, and that she did hurt the rest that complained of her by squeezing puppets like them, and so almost choked them; that she and Martha Carrier did both ride on a stick or pole when they went to the witch-meeting at Salem Village, and that the stick broke as they were carried in the air above the tops of the trees, and they fell: but she did hang fast about the neck of Goody Carrier, and they were presently at the village; that she had heard some of the witches say that there were three hundred and five in the whole country, and that they would ruin that place, the village; that there were also present at that meeting two men besides Mr. Burroughs, the minister, and one of them had gray hair; and that the discourse among the witches at the meeting in Salem Village was, that they would afflict there to set up the Devil's kingdom. 

The confession of which the foregoing is the substance appears to havebeen drawn out at four several examinations on different days, duringwhich she was induced by the influences around her to make hertestimony more and more extravagant at each successive examination. Her daughter, Mary Lacy, called Goody Lacy, was brought up on thecharge of witchcraft at the same time; and, upon finding the motherconfessing, she saw that her only safety was in confessing also. Whenconfronted, the daughter cried out to the mother, "We have forsakenJesus Christ, and the Devil hath got hold of us. How shall we getclear of this Evil One?" She proceeded to say that she had accompaniedher mother and Goody Carrier, all three riding together on the pole, to Salem Village. She then made the following statement: "About threeor four years ago, she saw Mistress Bradbury, Goody Howe, and GoodyNurse baptized by the old Serpent at Newbury Falls; that he dippedtheir heads in the water, and then said they were his, and he hadpower over them; that there were six baptized at that time, who weresome of the chief or higher powers, and that there might be near abouta hundred in company at that time. " It being asked her "after whatmanner she went to Newbury Falls, " she answered, "the Devil carriedher in his arms. " She said, that, "if she did take a rag, and roll itup together, and imagine it to represent such and such a person, thenthat, whatsoever she did to that rag so rolled up, the personrepresented thereby would be in like manner afflicted. " Her daughter, also named Mary Lacy, followed the example of her mother andgrandmother, and made confession. 

An examination of the confessions shows, that, when accused personsmade up their minds to confess, they saw, that, to make their safetysecure, it was necessary to go the whole length of the popularsuperstition and fanaticism. In many instances, they appear to havefabricated their stories with much ingenuity and tact, making themtally with the statements of the accusers, adding points and itemsthat gave an air of truthfulness, and falling in with current notionsand fancies. They were undoubtedly under training by the girls, andwere provided with the materials of their testimony. Their depositionsare valuable, inasmuch as they enable us to collect about the whole ofthe notions then prevalent on the subject. If, in delivering theirevidences, any prompting was needed, the accusers were at theirelbows, and helped them along in their stories. If, in any particular, they were in danger of contradicting themselves or others, they werechecked or diverted. In one case, a confessing witch was damaging herown testimony, whereupon one of the afflicted cried out that she sawthe shapes or apparitions of other witches interfering with herutterance. The witness took the hint, pretended to have lost the powerof expressing herself, and was removed from the stand. 

In some cases, the confessing witches showed great adroitness, andknowledge of human nature. When a leading minister was visiting themin the prison, one of them cried out as he passed her cell, callinghim by name, "Oh! I remember a text you preached on in England, twentyyears since, from these words: 'Your sin will find you out;' for Ifind it to be true in my own case. " This skilful compliment, showingthe power of his preaching making an impression which time could notefface, was no doubt flattering to the good man, and secured for herhis favorable influence. 

Justice requires that their own explanation of the influences whichled them to confess should not be withheld. 

The following declaration of six women belonging to Andover isaccompanied by a paper signed by more than fifty of the mostrespectable inhabitants of that town, testifying to their goodcharacter, in which it is said that "by their sober, godly, andexemplary conversation, they have obtained a good report in the place, where they have been well esteemed and approved in the church of whichthey are members:"--

 "We whose names are underwritten, inhabitants of Andover, when as that horrible and tremendous judgment, beginning at Salem Village, in the year 1692, by some called witchcraft, first breaking forth at Mr. Parris's house, several young persons, being seemingly afflicted, did accuse several persons for afflicting them; and many there believing it so to be, we being informed, that, if a person was sick, the afflicted person could tell what or who was the cause of that sickness: John Ballard of Andover, his wife being sick at the same time, he, either from himself, or by the advice of others, fetched two of the persons called the afflicted persons from Salem Village to Andover, which was the beginning of that dreadful calamity that befell us in Andover, believing the said accusations to be true, sent for the said persons to come together to the meeting-house in Andover, the afflicted persons being there. After Mr. Barnard had been at prayer, we were blindfolded, and our hands were laid upon the afflicted persons, they being in their fits, and falling into their fits at our coming into their presence, as they said: and some led us, and laid our hands upon them; and then they said they were well, and that we were guilty of afflicting them. Whereupon we were all seized as prisoners, by a warrant from the justice of the peace, and forthwith carried to Salem; and by reason of that sudden surprisal, we knowing ourselves altogether innocent of that crime, we were all exceedingly astonished and amazed, and consternated and affrighted, even out of our reason; and our nearest and dearest relations, seeing us in that dreadful condition, and knowing our great danger, apprehended there was no other way to save our lives, as the case was then circumstanced, but by our confessing ourselves to be such and such persons as the afflicted represented us to be, they, out of tenderness and pity, persuaded us to confess what we did confess. And, indeed, that confession that it is said we made was no other than what was suggested to us by some gentlemen, they telling us that we were witches, and they knew it, and we knew it, which made us think that it was so; and, our understandings, our reason, our faculties almost gone, we were not capable of judging of our condition; as also the hard measures they used with us rendered us incapable of making our defence, but said any thing, and every thing which they desired, and most of what we said was but in effect a consenting to what they said. Some time after, when we were better composed, they telling us what we had confessed, we did profess that we were innocent and ignorant of such things; and we hearing that Samuel Wardwell had renounced his confession, and was quickly after condemned and executed, some of us were told we were going after Wardwell. 

 "MARY OSGOOD. MARY TYLER. DELIVERANCE DANE. ABIGAIL BARKER. SARAH WILSON. HANNAH TYLER. "

The means employed, and the influences brought to bear upon personsaccused, were, in many cases, such as wholly to overpower them, and torelieve their confessions, to a great extent, of a criminal character. They were scarcely responsible moral agents. In the month of October, Increase Mather came to Salem, to confer with the confessing witchesin prison. The result of his examinations is preserved in a documentof which he is supposed to have been the author. The followingextracts afford some explanation of the whole subject:--

 "Goodwife Tyler did say, that, when she was first apprehended, she had no fears upon her, and did think that nothing could have made her confess against herself. But since, she had found, to her great grief, that she had wronged the truth, and falsely accused herself. She said that, when she was brought to Salem, her brother Bridges rode with her; and that, all along the way from Andover to Salem, her brother kept telling her that she must needs be a witch, since the afflicted accused her, and at her touch were raised out of their fits, and urging her to confess herself a witch. She as constantly told him that she was no witch, that she knew nothing of witchcraft, and begged him not to urge her to confess. However, when she came to Salem, she was carried to a room, where her brother on one side, and Mr. John Emerson on the other side, did tell her that she was certainly a witch, and that she saw the Devil before her eyes at that time (and, accordingly, the said Emerson would attempt with his hand to beat him away from her eyes); and they so urged her to confess, that she wished herself in any dungeon, rather than be so treated. Mr. Emerson told her, once and again, 'Well, I see you will not confess! Well, I will now leave you; and then you are undone, body and soul, for ever. ' Her brother urged her to confess, and told her that, in so doing, she could not lie: to which she answered, 'Good brother, do not say so; for I shall lie if I confess, and then who shall answer unto God for my lie?' He still asserted it, and said that God would not suffer so many good men to be in such an error about it, and that she would be hanged if she did not confess; and continued so long and so violently to urge and press her to confess, that she thought, verily, that her life would have gone from her, and became so terrified in her mind that she owned, at length, almost any thing that they propounded to her; that she had wronged her conscience in so doing; she was guilty of a great sin in belying of herself, and desired to mourn for it so long as she lived. This she said, and a great deal more of the like nature; and all with such affection, sorrow, relenting, grief, and mourning, as that it exceeds any pen to describe and express the same. "

 "Goodwife Wilson said that she was in the dark as to some things in her confession. Yet she asserted that, knowingly, she never had familiarity with the Devil; that, knowingly, she never consented to the afflicting of any person, &c. However, she said that truly she was in the dark as to the matter of her being a witch. And being asked how she was in the dark, she replied, that the afflicted persons crying out of her as afflicting them made her fearful of herself; and that was all that made her say that she was in the dark. "

 "Goodwife Bridges said that she had confessed against herself things which were all utterly false; and that she was brought to her confession by being told that she certainly was a witch, and so made to believe it, --though she had no other grounds so to believe. "

Some explanation of the details which those, prevailed upon toconfess, put into their testimony, and which seemed, at the time, toestablish and demonstrate the truth of their statements, is affordedby what Mary Osgood is reported, by Increase Mather, to have said tohim on this occasion:--

 "Being asked why she prefixed a time, and spake of her being baptized, &c. , about twelve years since, she replied and said, that, when she had owned the thing, they asked the time, to which she answered that she knew not the time. But, being told that she did know the time, and must tell the time, and the like, she considered that about twelve years before (when she had her last child) she had a fit of sickness, and was melancholy; and so thought that that time might be as proper a time to mention as any, and accordingly did prefix the said time. Being asked about the cat, in the shape of which she had confessed that the Devil had appeared to her, &c. , she replied, that, being told that the Devil had appeared to her, and must needs appear to her, &c. (she being a witch), she at length did own that the Devil had appeared to her; and, being pressed to say in what creature's shape he appeared, she at length did say that it was in the shape of a cat. Remembering that, some time before her being apprehended, as she went out at her door, she saw a cat, &c. ; not as though she any whit suspected the said cat to be the Devil, in the day of it, but because some creature she must mention, and this came into her mind at that time. "

This poor woman, as well as several others, besides Goodwife Tyler, who denied and renounced their confessions, manifested, as Dr. Matheraffirms, the utmost horror and anguish at the thought that they couldhave been so wicked as to have belied themselves, and brought injuryupon others by so doing. They "bewailed and lamented their accusing ofothers, about whom they never knew any evil" in their lives. Theyproved the sincerity of their repentance by abandoning and denouncingtheir confessions, and thus offering their lives as a sacrifice toatone for their falsehood. They were then awaiting their trial; andthere seemed no escape from the awful fate which had befallen allpersons brought to trial before, and who had not confessed or hadwithdrawn their confession. Fortunately for them, the Court did notmeet again in 1692; and they were acquitted at the regular session, inthe January following. 

In one of Calef's tracts, he sums up his views, on the subject of theconfessions, as follows:--

 "Besides the powerful argument of life (and freedom from hardships, not only promised, but also performed to all that owned their guilt), there are numerous instances of the tedious examinations before private persons, many hours together; they all that time urging them to confess (and taking turns to persuade them), till the accused were wearied out by being forced to stand so long, or for want of sleep, &c. , and so brought to give assent to what they said; they asking them, 'Were you at such a witch meeting?' or, 'Have you signed the Devil's book?' &c. Upon their replying 'Yes, ' the whole was drawn into form, as their confession. "

This accounts for the similarity of construction and substance of theconfessions generally. 

Calef remarks:--

 "But that which did mightily further such confessions was their nearest relations urging them to it. These, seeing no other way of escape for them, thought it the best advice that could be given; hence it was, that the husbands of some, by counsel, often urging, and utmost earnestness, and children upon their knees intreating, have at length prevailed with them to say they were guilty. "

One of the most painful things in the whole affair was, that theabsolute conviction of the guilt of the persons accused, pervading thecommunity, took full effect upon the minds of many relatives andfriends. They did not consider it as a matter of the least possibledoubt. They therefore looked upon it as wicked obstinacy not toconfess, and, in this sense, an additional and most conclusiveevidence of a mind alienated from truth and wholly given over toSatan. This turned natural love and previous friendships intoresentment, indignation, and abhorrence, which left the unhappyprisoners in a condition where only the most wonderful clearness ofconviction and strength of character could hold them up. And, in manycases where they yielded, it was not from unworthy fear, or forself-preservation, but because their judgment was overthrown, andtheir minds in complete subjection and prostration. 

There can, indeed, hardly be a doubt, that, in some instances, theconfessing persons really believed themselves guilty. To explain this, we must look into the secret chambers of the human soul; we must readthe history of the imagination, and consider its power over theunderstanding. We must transport ourselves to the dungeon, and thinkof its dark and awful walls, its dreary hours, its tedious loneliness, its heavy and benumbing fetters and chains, its scanty fare, and allits dismal and painful circumstances. We must reflect upon theirinfluence over a terrified and agitated, an injured and broken spirit. We must think of the situation of the poor prisoner, cut off fromhope; hearing from all quarters, and at all times, morning, noon, andnight, that there is no doubt of his guilt; surrounded and overwhelmedby accusations and evidence, gradually but insensibly mingling andconfounding the visions and vagaries of his troubled dreams with thereveries of his waking hours, until his reason becomes obscured, hisrecollections are thrown into derangement, his mind loses the power ofdistinguishing between what is perpetually told him by others and whatbelongs to the suggestions of his own memory: his imagination at lastgains complete ascendency over his other faculties, and he believesand declares himself guilty of crimes of which he is as innocent asthe child unborn. The history of the transaction we have beenconsidering, affords a clear illustration of the truth andreasonableness of this explanation. 

The facility with which persons can be persuaded, by perpetuallyassailing them with accusations of the truth of a charge, in realitynot true, even when it is made against themselves, has been frequentlynoticed. Addison, in one of the numbers of his "Spectator, " speaks ofit in connection with our present subject: "When an old woman, " sayshe, "begins to dote, and grow chargeable to a parish, she is generallyturned into a witch, and fills the whole country with extravagantfancies, imaginary distempers, and terrifying dreams. In the meantime, the poor wretch that is the innocent occasion of so many evilsbegins to be frighted at herself, and sometimes confesses secretcommerces and familiarities that her imagination forms in a deliriousold age. This frequently cuts off charity from the greatest objects ofcompassion, and inspires people with a malevolence towards those poor, decrepit parts of our species in whom human nature is defaced byinfirmity and dotage. "

This passage is important, in addition to the bearing it has upon thepoint we have been considering, as describing the state of opinion andfeeling in England twenty years after the folly had been explodedhere. In another number of the same series of essays, he bearsevidence, that the superstitions which here came to a head in 1692 hadlong been prevalent in the mother-country: "Our forefathers lookedupon nature with more reverence and horror before the world wasenlightened by learning and philosophy, and loved to astonishthemselves with the apprehensions of witchcraft, prodigies, charms, and enchantments. There was not a village in England that had not aghost in it; the churchyards were all haunted; every large common hada circle of fairies belonging to it; and there was scarce a shepherdto be met with who had not seen a spirit. " These fancies still lingerin the minds of some in the Old World and in the New. 

After allowing for the utmost extent of prevalent superstitions, theexaggerations incident to a state of general excitement, and thefertile inventive faculties of the accusing girls, there is much inthe evidence that cannot easily be accounted for. In other cases thanthat of Westgate, we find the symptoms of that bewildered condition ofthe senses and imagination not at all surprising or unusual in theexperience of men staggering home in midnight hours from tavernhaunts. Disturbed dreams were, it is not improbable, a fruitfulsource of delusion. A large part of the evidence is susceptible ofexplanation by the supposition, that the witnesses had confounded thevisions of their sleeping, with the actual observations andoccurrences of their waking hours. At the trial of Susanna Martin, itwas in evidence, that one John Kembal had agreed to purchase a puppyfrom the prisoner, but had afterwards fallen back from his bargain, and procured a puppy from some other person, and that Martin was heardto say, "If I live, I will give him puppies enough. " The circumstancesseem to me to render it probable, that the following piece of evidencegiven by Kembal, and to which the Court attached great weight, was theresult of a nightmare occasioned by his apprehension and dread of thefulfilment of the reported threat:--

 "I, this deponent, coming from his intended house in the woods to Edmund Elliot's house where I dwelt, about the sunset or presently after; and there did arise a little black cloud in the north-west, and a few drops of rain, and the wind blew pretty hard. In going between the house of John Weed and the meeting-house, this deponent came by several stumps of trees by the wayside; and he by impulse he can give no reason of, that made him tumble over the stumps one after another, though he had his axe upon his shoulder which put him in much danger, and made him resolved to avoid the next, but could not. 

 "And, when he came a little below the meeting-house, there did appear a little thing like a puppy, of a darkish color. It shot between my legs forward and backward, as one that were dancing the hay. [A] And this deponent, being free from all fear, used all possible endeavors to cut it with his axe, but could not hurt it; and, as he was thus laboring with his axe, the puppy gave a little jump from him, and seemed to go into the ground. 

 "In a little further going, there did appear a black puppy, somewhat bigger than the first, but as black as a coal to his apprehension, which came against him with such violence as its quick motions did exceed his motions of his axe, do what he could. And it flew at his belly, and away, and then at his throat and over his shoulder one way, and go off, and up at it again another way; and with such quickness, speed, and violence did it assault him, as if it would tear out his throat or his belly. A good while, he was without fear; but, at last, I felt my heart to fail and sink under it, that I thought my life was going out. And I recovered myself, and gave a start up, and ran to the fence, and calling upon God and naming the name Jesus Christ, and then it invisibly away. My meaning is, it ceased at once; but this deponent made it not known to anybody, for fretting his wife. "[B]

[Footnote A: Love's Labour's Lost, act v. , sc. 1. ]

[Footnote B: There are several other depositions in these cases, thatmay perhaps be explained under the head of nightmare. The followingare specimens; that, for instance, of Robert Downer, of Salisbury, whotestifies and says, --

 "That, several years ago, Susanna Martin, the then wife of George Martin, being brought to court for a witch, the said Downer, having some words with her, this deponent, among other things, told her he believed that she was a witch, by what was said or witnessed against her; at which she, seeming not well affected, said that a, or some, she-devil would fetch him away shortly, at which this deponent was not much moved; but at night, as he lay in his bed in his own house, alone, there came at his window the likeness of a cat, and by and by came up to his bed, took fast hold of his throat, and lay hard upon him a considerable while, and was like to throttle him. At length, he minded what Susanna Martin threatened him with the day before. He strove what he could, and said, 'Avoid, thou she-devil, in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost!' and then it let him go, and jumped down upon the floor, and went out at the window again. "

Susanna Martin, by the boldness and severity of her language, indefending herself against the charge of witchcraft, had evidently, fora long time, rendered herself an object of dread, and seems to havedisturbed the dreams of the superstitious throughout the neighborhood. For instance, Jarvis Ring, of Salisbury, made oath as follows:--

 "That, about seven or eight years ago, he had been several times afflicted, in the night-time, by some body or some thing coming up upon him when he was in bed, and did sorely afflict him by lying upon him; and he could neither move nor speak while it was upon him, but sometimes made a kind of noise that folks did hear him and come up to him; and, as soon as anybody came, it would be gone. This it did for a long time, both then and since, but he did never see anybody clearly; but one time, in the night, it came upon me as at other times, and I did then see the person of Susanna Martin, of Amesbury. I, this deponent, did perfectly see her; and she came to this deponent, and took him by the hand, and bit him by the finger by force, and then came and lay upon him awhile, as formerly, and after a while went away. The print of the bite is yet to be seen on the little finger of his right hand; for it was hard to heal. He further saith, that several times he was asleep when it came; but, at that time, he was as fairly awaked as ever he was, and plainly saw her shape, and felt her teeth, as aforesaid. "

Barnard Peach made oath substantially as follows:--

 "That about six or seven years past, being in bed on a Lord's-day night, he heard a scrambling at the window, and saw Susanna Martin come in at the window, and jump down upon the floor. She was in her hood and scarf, and the same dress that she was in before, at meeting the same day. Being come in, she was coming up towards this deponent's face, but turned back to his feet, and took hold of them, and drew up his body into a heap, and lay upon him about an hour and a half or two hours, in all which time this deponent could not stir nor speak; but, feeling himself beginning to be loosened or lightened, and he beginning to strive, he put out his hand among the clothes, and took hold of her hand, and brought it up to his mouth, and bit three of the fingers (as he judges) to the breaking of the bones; which done, the said Martin went out of the chamber, down the stairs, and out of the door. The deponent further declared, that, on another Lord's-day night, while sleeping on the hay in a barn, about midnight the said Susanna Martin and another came out of the shop into the barn, and one of them said, 'Here he is, ' and then came towards this deponent. He, having a quarter-staff, made a blow at them; but the roof of the barn prevented it, and they went away: but this deponent followed them, and, as they were going towards the window, made another blow at them, and struck them both down; but away they went out at the shop-window, and this deponent saw no more of them. And the rumor went, that the said Martin had a broken head at that time; but the deponent cannot speak to that upon his own knowledge. "

Any one who has had the misfortune to be subject to nightmare willfind the elements of his own experience very much resembling thedescriptions given by Kembal, Downer, Ring, and Peach. The terrors towhich superstition, credulity, and ignorance subjected their minds;the frightful tales of witchcraft and apparitions to which they wereaccustomed to listen; and the contagious fears of the neighborhood inreference to Susanna Martin, taken in connection with a disordereddigestion, an overloaded stomach, and a hard bed, or a strangelodging-place, --are wholly sufficient to account for all the phenomenato which they testified. ]

We are all exposed to the danger of confounding the impressions leftby the imagination, when, set free from all confinement, it runs wildin dreams, with the actual experiences of wakeful faculties in reallife. It is a topic worthy the consideration of writers on evidence, and of legal tribunals. So also is the effect, upon the personalconsciousness, of the continued repetition of the same story, or ofhearing it repeated by others. Instances are given in books, --perhapscan be recalled by our own individual experience or observation, --inwhich what was originally a deliberate fabrication of falsehood or offancy has come, at last, to be regarded as a veritable truth and areal occurrence. 

A thorough and philosophical treatise on the subject of evidence is, in view of these considerations, much needed. The liability all menare under to confound the fictions of their imaginations with therealities of actual observation is not understood with sufficientclearness by the community; and, so long as it is not understood andregarded, serious mistakes and inconveniences will be apt to occur inseasons of general excitement. We are still disposed to attribute moreimportance than we ought to strong convictions, without stopping toinquire whether they may not be in reality delusions of theunderstanding. The cause of truth demands a more thorough examinationof this whole subject. The visions that appeared before the mind ofthe celebrated Colonel Gardiner are still regarded by the generalityof pious people as evidence of miraculous interposition, while, justso far as they are evidence to that point, so far is the authority ofChristianity overthrown; for it is a fact, that Lord Herbert ofCherbury believed with equal sincerity and confidence that he had beenvouchsafed a similar vision sanctioning his labors, when about topublish what has been pronounced one of the most powerful attacks evermade upon our religion. It is dangerous to advance arguments in favorof any cause which may be founded upon nothing better than thereveries of an ardent imagination!

The phenomena of dreams, of the exercises and convictions which occupythe mind, while the avenues of the senses are closed, and the soul ismore or less extricated from its connection with the body, particularly in the peculiar conditions of partial slumber, are amongthe deep mysteries of human experience. The writers on mentalphilosophy have not given them the attention they deserve. 

The testimony in these trials is particularly valuable as showing thepower of the imagination to completely deceive and utterly falsify thesenses of sober persons, when wide awake and in broad daylight. Thefollowing deposition was given in Court under oath. The partiestestifying were of unquestionable respectability. The man was probablya brother of James Bayley, the first minister of the Salem Villageparish. 

 "THE DEPOSITION OF JOSEPH BAYLEY, aged forty-four years. --Testifieth and saith, that, on the twenty-fifth day of May last, myself and my wife being bound to Boston, on the road, when I came in sight of the house where John Procter did live, there was a very hard blow struck on my breast, which caused great pain in my stomach and amazement in my head, but did see no person near me, only my wife behind me on the same horse; and, when I came against said Procter's house, according to my understanding, I did see John Procter and his wife at said house. Procter himself looked out of the window, and his wife did stand just without the door. I told my wife of it; and she did look that way, and could see nothing but a little maid at the door. Afterwards, about half a mile from the aforesaid house, I was taken speechless for some short time. My wife did ask me several questions, and desired me, that, if I could not speak, I should hold up my hand; which I did, and immediately I could speak as well as ever. And, when we came to the way where Salem road cometh into Ipswich road, there I received another blow on my breast, which caused so much pain that I could not sit on my horse. And, when I did alight off my horse, to my understanding, I saw a woman coming towards us about sixteen or twenty pole from us, but did not know who it was: my wife could not see her. When I did get up on my horse again, to my understanding, there stood a cow where I saw the woman. After that, we went to Boston without any further molestation; but, after I came home again to Newbury, I was pinched and nipped by something invisible for some time: but now, through God's goodness to me, I am well again. --_Jurat in curia_ by both persons. "

Bayley and his wife were going to Boston on election week. It was agood two days' journey from Newbury, as the roads then were, andriding as they did. According to the custom of the times, she wasmounted on a pillion behind him. They had probably passed the night atthe house of Sergeant Thomas Putnam, with whom he was connected bymarriage. It was at the height of the witchcraft delirium. ThomasPutnam's house was the very focus of it. There they had listened tohighly wrought accounts of its wonders and terrors, had witnessed theamazing phenomena exhibited by Ann Putnam and Mercy Lewis, and theirminds been filled with images of spectres of living witches, andghosts of the dead. They had seen with their own eyes the tortures ofthe girls under cruel diabolical influence, of which they had heard somuch, and realized the dread outbreak of Satan and his agents upon thelives and souls of men. 

They started the next morning on their way through the gloomy woodsand over the solitary road. It was known that they were to pass thehouse of John Procter, believed to be a chief resort of devilishspirits. Oppressed with terror and awe, Bayley was on the watch, hisheart in his mouth. The moment he came in sight, his nervous agitationreached its climax; and he experienced the shock he describes. When hecame opposite to the house, to his horror there was Procter looking athim from the window, and Procter's wife standing outside of the door. He knew, that, in their proper persons and natural bodies, they were, at that moment, both of them, and had been, for six weeks, in irons, in one of the cells of the jail at Boston. Bayley's wife, from herposition on the pillion behind him, had her face directed to the otherside of the road. He told her what he saw. She looked round to thehouse, and could see nothing but a little maid at the door. After oneor two more fits of fright, he reached the Lynn road, had escaped fromthe infernal terrors of the infected region, and his senses resumedtheir natural functions. It was several days before his nervousagitations ceased. Altogether, this is a remarkable case ofhallucination: showing that the wildest fancies brought before themind in dreams may be paralleled in waking hours; and that mentalexcitement may, even then, close the avenues of the senses, excludethe perception of reality, and substitute unsubstantial visions in theplace of actual and natural objects. 

There may be an interest in some minds to know who the "little maid atthe door" was. The elder children of John Procter were either marriedoff, or lived on his farm at Ipswich, with the exception of Benjamin, his oldest son, who remained with his father on the Salem farm. Benjamin had been imprisoned two days before Bayley passed the house. Four days before, Sarah, sixteen years of age, had also been arrested, and committed to jail. This left only William, eighteen years of age, who, three days after, was himself put into prison; Samuel, seven;Abigail, between three and four years of age; and one still younger. No female of the family was then at the house older than Abigail. Thispoor deserted child was "the little maid. " Curiosity to see thepassing strangers, or possibly the hope that they might be her fatherand mother, or her brother and sister, brought her to the door. 

In the terrible consequences that resulted from the mischievous, andperhaps at the outset merely sportive, proceedings of the children inMr. Parris's family, we have a striking illustration of the principle, that no one can foretell, with respect either to himself or others, the extent of the suffering and injury that may be occasioned by theleast departure from truth, or from the practice of deception. In thehorrible succession of crimes through which those young persons wereled to pass, in the depth of depravity to which they were thrown, wediscern the fate that endangers all who enter upon a career ofwickedness. 

No one can have an adequate knowledge of the human mind, who has notcontemplated its developments in scenes like those that have now beenrelated. It may be said of the frame of our spiritual, even with moreemphasis than of our corporeal nature, that we are fearfully andwonderfully made. In the maturity of his bodily and mentalorganization, health gliding through his veins, strength and symmetryclothing his form, intelligence beaming from his countenance, andimmortality stamped on his brow, man is indeed the noblest work ofGod. In the degradation and corruption to which he can descend, he isthe most odious and loathsome object in the creation. The human mind, when all its faculties are fully developed and in proper proportions, reason seated on its rightful throne and shedding abroad its light, memory embracing the past, hope smiling upon the future, faith leaningon Heaven, and the affections diffusing through all their gentlewarmth, is worthy of its source, deserves its original title of "imageof God, " and is greater and better than the whole material universe. It is nobler than all the works of God; for it is an emanation, a partof God himself, "a ray from the fountain of light. " But where, I ask, can you find a more deplorable and miserable object than the mind inruins, tossed by its own rebellious principles, and distorted by themonstrously unequal development of its faculties? You will look invain upon the earthquake, the volcano, or the hurricane, for thoseelements of the awful and terrible which are manifested in a communityof men whose passions have trampled upon their principles, whoseimaginations have overthrown the government of reason, and who areswept along by the torrent until all order and security are swallowedup and lost. Such a spectacle we have now been witnessing. We haveseen the whole population of this place and vicinity yielding to thesway of their credulous fancies, allowing their passions to be workedup to a tremendous pitch of excitement, and rushing into excesses offolly and violence that have left a stain on their memory, and willawaken a sense of shame, pity, and amazement in the minds of theirlatest posterity. 

There is nothing more mysterious than the self-deluding power of themind, and there never were scenes in which it was more clearlydisplayed than the witchcraft prosecutions. Honest men testified, withperfect confidence and sincerity, to the most absurd impossibilities;while those who thought themselves victims of diabolical influencewould actually exhibit, in their corporeal frames, all the appropriatesymptoms of the sufferings their imaginations had brought upon them. Great ignorance prevailed in reference to the influences of the bodyand the mind upon each other. While the imagination was called into amore extensive and energetic action than at any succeeding or previousperiod, its properties and laws were but little understood: the extentof the connection of the will and the muscular system, the reciprocalinfluence of the nerves and the fancy, and the strong and universallypervading sympathy between our physical and moral constitutions, werealmost wholly unknown. These important subjects, indeed, are butimperfectly understood at the present day. 

It may perhaps be affirmed, that the relations of the human mind withthe spiritual world will never be understood while we continue in thepresent stage of existence and mode of being. The error of ourancestors--and it is an error into which men have always been prone tofall, and from which our own times are by no means exempt--was inimagining that their knowledge had extended, in this direction, beyondthe boundary fixed unalterably to our researches, while in thiscorporeal life. 

It admits of much question, whether human science can ever find asolid foundation in what relates to the world of spirits. The onlyinstrument of knowledge we can here employ is language. Carefulthinkers long ago came to the conclusion, that it is impossible toframe a language precisely and exclusively adapted to convey abstractand spiritual ideas, even if it is possible, as some philosophers havedenied, for the mind, in its present state, to have such ideas. Allattempts to construct such a language, though made by the mostingenious men, have failed. Language is based upon imagery, andassociations drawn from so much of the world as the senses disclose tous; that is, from material objects and their relations. We are hereconfined, as it were, within narrow walls. We can catch only glimpsesof what is above and around us, outside of those walls. Such glimpsesmay be vouchsafed, from time to time, to rescue us from sinking intomaterialism, and to keep alive our faith in scenes of existenceremaining to be revealed when the barriers of our imprisonment shallbe taken down, and what we call death lift us to a clearer and broadervision of universal being. 

Of the reality of the spiritual world, we are assured by consciousnessand by faith; but our knowledge of that world, so far as it can gointo particulars, or become the subject of definition or expression, extends no further than revelation opens the way. In all ages, menhave been awakened to the "wonders of the invisible world;" but theyremain "wonders" still. Nothing like a permanent, stable, or distinctscience has ever been achieved in this department. Man and God are allthat are placed within our ken. Metaphysics and Theology are the namesgiven to the sciences that relate to them. The greater the number ofbooks written by human learning and ingenuity to expound them, themore advanced the intelligence and piety of mankind, the less, it isconfessed, do we know of them in detail, the more they rise above ourcomprehension, the more unfathomable become their depths. Experience, history, the progress of light, all increase our sense of theimpossibility of estimating the capacities of the human soul. So alsowe find that the higher we rise towards the Deity, in thecontemplation of his works and word, the more does he continue totranscend our power to describe or imagine his greatness and glory. The revelation which the Saviour brought to mankind is all that theheart of man need desire, or the mind of man can comprehend. We areGod's children, and he is our Father. That is all; and, the wiser andbetter we become, the more we are convinced and satisfied that it isenough. 

There are, undoubtedly, innumerable beings in the world of spirits, besides departed souls, the Redeemer, and the Father. But of suchbeings we have, while here, no absolute and specific knowledge. Inevery age, as well as in our own, there have been persons who havebelieved themselves to hold communication with unseen spirits. Themethods of entering into such communication have been infinitelydiversified, from the incantations of ancient sorcery to the mediumsand rappings of the present day. In former periods, particularly wherethe belief of witchcraft prevailed, it was thought that suchcommunications could be had only with evil spirits, and, mostly, withthe Chief of evil spirits. They were accordingly treated as criminal, and made the subject of the severest penalties known to the law. Inour day, no such penalties are attached to the practice of seekingspiritual communications. Those who have a fancy for such experimentsare allowed to amuse themselves in this way without reproach ormolestation. It is not charged upon them that they are dealing withthe Evil One or any of his subordinates. They do not imagine such athing themselves. I have no disposition, at any time, in any givencase, to dispute the reality of the wonderful stories told inreference to such matters. All that I am prompted ever to remark is, that, if spirits do come, as is believed, at the call of those whoseek to put themselves into communication with them, there is noevidence, I venture to suggest, that they are good spirits. I havenever heard of their doing much good, substantially, to any one. Noimportant truth has been revealed by them, no discovery been made, noscience had its field enlarged; no department of knowledge has beenbrought into a clearer light; no great interest has been promoted; nomovement of human affairs, whether in the action of nations or thetransactions of men, has been advanced or in any way facilitated; noimpulse has been given to society, and no elevation to life andcharacter. It may be that the air is full of spiritual beings, hovering about us; but all experience shows that no benefit can bederived from seeking their intervention to share with us the duties orthe burdens of our present probation. The mischiefs which have flowedfrom the belief that they can operate upon human affairs, and fromattempting to have dealings with them, have been illustrated in thecourse of our narrative. In this view of the subject, no law isneeded to prevent real or pretended communication with invisiblebeings. Enlightened reflection, common sense, natural prudence, wouldseem to be sufficient to keep men from meddling at all with practices, or countenancing notions, from which all history proclaims that nogood has ever come, but incalculable evil flowed. 

For the conduct of life, while here in these bodies, we must confineour curiosity to fields of knowledge open to our natural and ordinaryfaculties, and embraced within the limits of the established conditionof things. Our fathers filled their fancies with the visionary imagesof ghosts, demons, apparitions, and all other supposed forms andshadows of the invisible world; lent their ears to marvellous storiesof communications with spirits; gave to supernatural tales ofwitchcraft and demonology a wondering credence, and allowed them tooccupy their conversation, speculations, and reveries. They carried abelief of such things, and a proneness to indulge it, into their dailylife, their literature, and the proceedings of tribunals, ecclesiastical and civil. The fearful results shrouded their annals indarkness and shame. Let those results for ever stand conspicuous, beacon-monuments warning us, and coming generations, againstsuperstition in every form, and all credulous and vain attempts topenetrate beyond the legitimate boundaries of human knowledge. 

The phenomena of the real world, so far as science discloses them toour contemplation; the records of actual history; the lessons of ourown experience; the utterances of the voice within, audible only toourselves; and the teachings of the Divine Word, --are sufficient forthe exercise of our faculties and the education of our souls duringthis brief period of our being, while in these bodies. In God'sappointed time, we shall be transferred to a higher level of vision. Then, but not before, we may hope for re-union with disembodiedspirits, for intercourse with angels, and for a nearer and more opencommunion with all divine beings. 

The principal difference in the methods by which communications werebelieved to be made between mortals and spiritual beings, at the timeof the witchcraft delusion and now, is this. Then it was chiefly bythe medium of the eye, but at present by the ear. The "afflictedchildren" professed to have seen and conversed with the ghosts ofGeorge Burroughs's former wives and of others. They also professed tohave seen the shapes or appearances of living persons in a disembodiedform, or in the likeness of some animal or creature. Now it isaffirmed by those calling themselves Spiritualists, that, by certainrappings or other incantations, they can summon into immediate butinvisible presence the spirits of the departed, hold conferences withthem, and draw from them information not derivable from any sources ofhuman knowledge. There is no essential distinction between the old andthe new belief and practice. The consequences that resulted from theformer would be likely to result from the latter, if it should obtainuniversal or general credence, be allowed to mix with judicialproceedings, or to any extent affect the rights of person, property, or character. 

The "afflicted children" at Salem Village had, by long practice, become wonderful adepts in the art of jugglery, and probably ofventriloquism. They did many extraordinary things, and were believedto have constant communications with ghosts and spectres; but they didnot attain to spiritual rapping. If they had possessed that power, thecredulity of judges, ministers, magistrates, and people, would havebeen utterly overwhelmed, and no limit could have been put to thedestruction they might have wrought. 

If there was any thing supernatural in the witchcraft of 1692, if anyother than human spirits were concerned at all, one thing is beyond adoubt: they were shockingly wicked spirits, and led those who dealtwith them to the utmost delusion, crime, and perdition; and thisexample teaches all who seek to consult with spirits, through a mediumor in any other way, to be very strict to require beforehand the mostsatisfactory and conclusive evidence of good character before they putthemselves into communication with them. Spirits who are said toconverse with people, in these modern ages, cannot be considered ashaving much claim to a good repute. No valuable discovery of truth, noimportant guidance in human conduct, no useful instruction, has everbeen conveyed to mankind through them; and much mischief perhaps mayhave resulted from confiding in them. It is not wise to place ourminds under the influence of any of our fellow-creatures, in theordinary guise of humanity, unless we know something about thementitling them to our acquaintance; much less so, to take them intoour intimacy or confidence. Spirits cannot be put under oath, or theircredibility be subjected to tests. Whether they are spirits of truthor falsehood cannot be known; and common caution would seem to dictatean avoidance of their company. The fields of knowledge opened to us inthe works of mortal men; the stores of human learning and science; thepages of history, sacred or profane; the records of revelation; andthe instructions and conversation of the wise and good of ourfellow-creatures, while in the body, --are wide enough for ourexploration, and may well occupy the longest lifetime. 

In its general outlines and minuter details, Salem Witchcraft is anillustration of the fatal effects of allowing the imagination inflamedby passion to take the place of common sense, and of pushing thecuriosity and credence of the human mind, in this stage of our being, while in these corporeal embodiments, beyond the boundaries that oughtto limit their exercise. If we disregard those boundaries, and try tooverleap them, we shall be liable to the same results. The lessonneeds to be impressed equally upon all generations and ages of theworld's future history. Essays have been written and books publishedto prove that the sense of the miraculous is destined to decline asmankind becomes more enlightened, and ascribing a greater or lesstendency to the indulgence of this sense to particular periods of thechurch, or systems of belief, or schools of what is called philosophy. It is maintained that it was more prevalent in the mediæval ages thanin modern times. Some assert that it has had a greater development inCatholic than Protestant countries; and some, perhaps, insist upon thereverse. Some attempt to show that it has manifested itself moreremarkably among Puritans than in other classes of ProtestantChristians. The last and most pretentious form of this dogma is, thatthe sense of the miraculous fades away in the progress of whatarrogates to itself the name of Rationalism. This is one of thedelusive results of introducing generalization into historicaldisquisitions. History deals with man. Man is always the same. Therace consists, not of an aggregation, but of individuals, in all ages, never moulded or melted into classes. Each individual has everretained his distinctness from every other. There has been the sameinfinite variety in every period, in every race, in every nation. Society, philosophy, custom, can no more obliterate these varietiesthan they can bring the countenances and features of men intouniformity. Diversity everywhere alike prevails. The particular formsand shapes in which the sense of the miraculous may express itselfhave passed and will pass away in the progress of civilization. Butthe sense itself remains; just as particular costumes and fashions ofgarment pass away, while the human form, its front erect and itsvision towards the heavens, remains. The sense of the miraculousremains with Protestants as much as with Catholics, with Churchmen asmuch as with Puritans, with those who reject all creeds, equally withthose whose creeds are the longest and the oldest. In our day, it musthave been generally noticed, that the wonders of what imagines itselfto be Spiritualism are rather more accredited by persons who aspire tothe character of rationalists than by those who hold on tenaciously tothe old landmarks of Orthodoxy. 

The truth is, that the sense of the miraculous has not declined, andnever can. It will grow deeper and stronger with the progress of trueintelligence. As long as man thinks, he will feel that he is himself aperpetual miracle. The more he thinks, the more will he feel it. Themind which can wander into the deepest depths of the starry heavens, and feel itself to be there; which, pondering over the printed page, lives in the most distant past, communes with sages of hoar antiquity, with prophets and apostles, joins the disciples as they walk with therisen Lord to Emmaus, or mingles in the throng that listen to Paul atMars' Hill, --knows itself to be beyond the power of space or time, andgreater than material things. It knows not what it shall be; but itfeels that it is something above the present and visible. It realizesthe spiritual world, and will do so more and more, the higher itsculture, the greater its freedom, and the wider its view of thematerial nature by which it is environed, while in this transitorystage of its history. 

The lesson of our story will be found not to discard spiritual things, but to teach us, while in the flesh, not to attempt to break throughpresent limitations, not to seek to know more than has been made knownof the unseen and invisible, but to keep the inquiries of our mindsand the action of society within the bounds of knowledge nowattainable, and extend our curious researches and speculations only asfar as we can here have solid ground to stand upon. 

To explain the superstitious opinions that took effect in thewitchcraft delusion, it is necessary to consider the state of biblicalcriticism at that period. That department of theological learning wasthen in a very immature condition. 

The authority of Scripture, as it appeared on the face of the standardversion, seemed to require them to pursue the course they adopted; andthose enlarged and just principles of interpretation which we aretaught by the learned of all denominations at the present day to applyto the Sacred Writings had not then been brought to the view of thepeople or received by the clergy. 

It was gravely argued, for instance, that there was nothing improbablein the idea that witches had the power, in virtue of their compactwith the Devil, of riding aloft through the air, because it isrecorded, in the history of our Lord's temptation, that Satantransported him in a similar manner to the pinnacle of the temple, and to the summit of an exceedingly high mountain. And Cotton Matherdeclares, that, to his apprehension, the disclosures of the wonderfuloperations of the Devil, upon and through his subjects, that were madein the course of the witchcraft prosecutions, had shed a marvellouslight upon the Scriptures! What a perversion of the Sacred Writings toemploy them for the purpose of sanctioning the extravagant anddelirious reveries of the human imagination! What a miserabledelusion, to suppose that the Word of God could receive illuminationfrom the most absurd and horrible superstition that ever brooded indarkness over the mind of man!

One of the sources of the delusion of 1692 was ignorance of manynatural laws that have been revealed by modern science. A vast amountof knowledge on these subjects has been attained since that time. Inour halls of education, in associations for the diffusion ofknowledge, and in a diversified and all-pervading popular literature, what was dark and impenetrable mystery then has been explained, accounted for, and brought within the grasp of all minds. Thecontemplation of the evils brought upon our predecessors by theirignorance of the laws of nature cannot but lead us to appreciate morehighly our opportunities to get knowledge in this department. As weadvance into the interior of the physical system to which we belong;are led in succession from one revelation of beauty and grandeur toanother, and the field of light and truth displaces that of darknessand mystery; while the fearful images that disturbed the faith andbewildered the thoughts of our fathers are dissolving and vanishing, the whole host of spirits, ghosts, and demons disappearing, and thepresence and providence of God alone found to fill all scenes andcause all effects, --our hearts ought to rise to him in loftieradoration and holier devotion. If, while we enjoy a fuller revelationof his infinite and all-glorious operations and designs than ourfathers did, the sentiment of piety which glowed in their hearts likea coal from the altar of God has been permitted to grow dim in ours, no reproach their errors and faults can possibly authorize will equalthat which will justly fall upon us. 

Another cause of their delusion was too great a dependence upon theimagination. We shall find no lesson more clearly taught by history, by experience, or by observation, than this, that man is never safewhile either his fancy or his feeling is the guiding principle of hisnature. There is a strong and constant attraction between hisimagination and his passions; and, if either is permitted to exerciseunlimited sway, the other will most certainly be drawn intoco-operation with it, and, when they are allowed to act withoutrestraint upon each other and with each other, they lead to thederangement and convulsion of his whole system. They constitute thecombustible elements of our being: one serves as the spark to explodethe other. Reason, enlightened by revelation and guided by conscience, is the great conservative principle: while that exercises thesovereign power over the fancy and the passions, we are safe; if it isdethroned, no limit can be assigned to the ruin that may follow. Inthe scenes we have now been called to witness, we have perceived towhat lengths of folly, cruelty, and crime even good men have beencarried, who relinquished the aid, rejected the counsels, andabandoned the guidance of their reason. 

Another influence that operated to produce the catastrophe in 1692 wasthe power of contagious sympathy. Every wise man and good citizenought to be aware of the existence and operation of this power. Thereseems indeed to be a constitutional, original, sympathy in our nature. When men act in a crowd, their heartstrings are prone to vibrate inunison. Whatever chord of passion is struck in one breast, the samewill ring forth its wild note through the whole mass. This principleshows itself particularly in seasons of excitement, and its powerrises in proportion to the ardor and zeal of those upon whom it acts. It is for every one who desires to be preserved from the excesses ofpopular feeling, and to prevent the community to which he belongs fromplunging into riotous and blind commotions, to keep his own judgmentand emotions as free as possible from a power that seizes all it canreach, draws them into its current, and sweeps them round and roundlike the Maelstrom, until they are overwhelmed and buried in itsdevouring vortex. When others are heated, the only wisdom is todetermine to keep cool; whenever a people or an individual is rushingheadlong, it is the duty of patriotism and of friendship to check themotion. 

In this connection it may be remarked--and I should be sorry to bringthe subject to a close without urging the thought upon yourattention--that the mere power of sympathy, the momentum with whichmen act in a crowd, is itself capable of convulsing society andoverthrowing all its safeguards, without the aid or supposed agency ofsupernatural beings. The early history of the colony of New Yorkpresents a case in point. 

In 1741, just half a century after the witchcraft prosecutions inMassachusetts, the city of New York, then containing about ninethousand inhabitants, witnessed a scene quite rivalling, in horror andfolly, that presented here. Some one started the idea, that aconspiracy was on foot, among the colored portion of the inhabitants, to murder the whites. The story was passed from one to another. Although subsequently ascertained to have been utterly withoutfoundation, no one stopped to inquire into its truth, or had thewisdom or courage to discountenance its circulation. Soon a universalpanic, like a conflagration, spread through the whole community; andthe results were most frightful. More than one hundred persons werecast into prison. Four white persons and eighteen negroes were hanged. Eleven negroes were burned at the stake, and fifty were transportedinto slavery. As in the witchcraft prosecutions, a clergyman was amongthe victims, and perished on the gallows. 

The "New-York Negro Plot, " as it was called, was indeed marked by allthe features of absurdity in the delusion, ferocity in the popularexcitement, and destruction along the path of its progress, whichbelonged to the witchcraft proceedings here, and shows that anypeople, given over to the power of contagious passion, may be swept bydesolation, and plunged into ruin. 

One of the practical lessons inculcated by the history that has nowbeen related is, that no duty is more certain, none more important, than a free and fearless expression of opinion, by all persons, on alloccasions. No wise or philosophic person would think of complaining ofthe diversities of sentiment it is likely to develop. Such diversitiesare the vital principle of free communities, and the only elements ofpopular intelligence. If the right to utter them is asserted by alland for all, tolerance is secured, and no inconvenience results. It isprobable that there were many persons here in 1692 who doubted thepropriety of the proceedings at their commencement, but who wereafterwards prevailed upon to fall into the current and swell the tide. If they had all discharged their duty to their country and theirconsciences by freely and boldly uttering their disapprobation anddeclaring their dissent, who can tell but that the whole tragedy mighthave been prevented? and, if it might, the blood of the innocent maybe said, in one sense, to be upon their heads. 

The leading features and most striking aspects of the witchcraftdelusion have been repeated in places where witches and theinterference of supernatural beings are never thought of: whenever acommunity gives way to its passions, and spurns the admonitions andcasts off the restraints of reason, there is a delusion that canhardly be described in any other phrase. We cannot glance our eye overthe face of our country without beholding such scenes: and, so long asthey are exhibited; so long as we permit ourselves to invest objectsof little or no real importance with such an inordinate imaginaryinterest that we are ready to go to every extremity rather thanrelinquish them; so long as we yield to the impulse of passion, andplunge into excitement, and take counsel of our feelings rather thanour judgment, --we are following in the footsteps of our fanaticalancestors. It would be wiser to direct our ridicule and reproaches tothe delusions of our own times than to those of a previous age; and itbecomes us to treat with charity and mercy the failings of ourpredecessors, at least until we have ceased to imitate and repeatthem. 

It has been my object to collect and arrange all the materials withinreach necessary to give a correct and adequate view of the passage ofhistory related and discussed in this work, and to suggest theconsiderations and conclusions required by truth and justice. It isworthy of the most thoughtful contemplation. The moralist, metaphysician, and political philosopher will find few chapters ofhuman experience more fraught with instruction, and may well ponderupon the lessons it teaches, scrutinize thoroughly all its periods, phases, and branches, analyze its causes, eliminate its elements, andmark its developments. The laws, energies, capabilities, andliabilities of our nature, as exhibited in the character ofindividuals and in the action of society, are remarkably illustrated. The essential facts belonging to the transaction, gathered fromauthentic records and reliable testimonies and traditions, have beenfaithfully presented. THE WITCHCRAFT DELUSION OF 1692, so faras I have been able to recover it from misunderstanding and oblivion, has been brought to view; and I indulge the belief, that the subjectwill commend itself to, and reward, the study of every meditativemind. 

I know not in what better terms the discussion of this subject can bebrought to a termination, than in those which express the conclusionsto which one of our own most distinguished citizens was brought, afterhaving examined the whole transaction with the eye of a lawyer and thespirit of a judge. The following is from the Centennial Discoursepronounced in Salem on the 18th of September, 1828, by the late Hon. Joseph Story, of the Supreme Court of the United States:--

"We may lament, then, " says he, "the errors of the times, which led tothese prosecutions. But surely our ancestors had no special reasonsfor shame in a belief which had the universal sanction of their ownand all former ages; which counted in its train philosophers, as wellas enthusiasts; which was graced by the learning of prelates, as wellas by the countenance of kings; which the law supported by itsmandates, and the purest judges felt no compunctions in enforcing. LetWitch Hill remain for ever memorable by this sad catastrophe, not toperpetuate our dishonor, but as an affecting, enduring proof of humaninfirmity; a proof that perfect justice belongs to one judgment-seatonly, --that which is linked to the throne of God. "

In the work which has now reached its close, many strange phases ofhumanity have been exposed. We have beheld, with astonishment andhorror, the extent to which it is liable to be the agent and victim ofdelusion and ruin. Folly that cannot be exceeded; wrong, outrage, andwoe, melting the heart that contemplates them; and crime, not withinour power or province to measure, --have passed before us. But not thedark side only of our nature has been displayed. Manifestations ofinnocence, heroism, invincible devotion to truth, integrity of soultriumphing over all the terrors and horrors that can be accumulated inlife and in death, Christian piety in its most heavenly radiance, havemingled in the drama, whose curtain is now to fall. Noble specimens ofvirtue in man and woman, old and young, have shed a light, as fromabove, upon its dark and melancholy scenes. Not only the sufferers, but some of those who shared the dread responsibility of the crisis, demand our commiseration, and did what they could to atone for theirerror. 

The conduct of Judge Sewall claims our particular admiration. Heobserved annually in private a day of humiliation and prayer, duringthe remainder of his life, to keep fresh in his mind a sense ofrepentance and sorrow for the part he bore in the trials. On the dayof the general fast, he rose in the place where he was accustomed toworship, the Old South, in Boston, and, in the presence of the greatassembly, handed up to the pulpit a written confession, acknowledgingthe error into which he had been led, praying for the forgiveness ofGod and his people, and concluding with a request to all thecongregation to unite with him in devout supplication, that it mightnot bring down the displeasure of the Most High upon his country, hisfamily, or himself. He remained standing during the public reading ofthe paper. This was an act of true manliness and dignity of soul. 

The following passage is found in his diary, under the date of April23, 1720, nearly thirty years afterwards. It was suggested by theperusal of Neal's "History of New England:"--

 "In Dr. Neal's 'History of New England, ' its nakedness is laid open in the businesses of the Quakers, Anabaptists, witchcraft. The judges' names are mentioned p. 502; my confession, p. 536, vol. Ii. The good and gracious God be pleased to save New England and me, and my family!"

There never was a more striking and complete fulfilment of theapostolic assurance, that the prayer of a righteous man availeth much, than in this instance. God has been pleased, in a remarkable manner, to save and bless New England. The favor of Heaven was bestowed uponJudge Sewall during the remainder of his life. He presided for manyyears on the bench where he committed the error so sincerely deploredby him, and was regarded by all as a benefactor, an ornament, and ablessing to the community: while his family have enjoyed to a highdegree the protection of Providence from that day to this; haveadorned every profession, and every department of society; have filledwith honor the most elevated stations; have graced, in successivegenerations, the same lofty seat their ancestor occupied; and been theobjects of the confidence, respect, and love of their fellow-citizens. 

Your thoughts have been led through scenes of the most distressing andrevolting character. I leave before your imaginations one bright withall the beauty of Christian virtue, --that which exhibits Judge Sewallstanding forth in the house of his God and in the presence of hisfellow-worshippers, making a public declaration of his sorrow andregret for the mistaken judgment he had co-operated with others inpronouncing. Here you have a representation of a truly great andmagnanimous spirit; a spirit to which the divine influence of ourreligion had given an expansion and a lustre that Roman or Grecianvirtue never knew; a spirit that had achieved a greater victory thanwarrior ever won, --a victory over itself; a spirit so noble and sopure, that it felt no shame in acknowledging an error, and publiclyimploring, for a great wrong done to his fellow-creatures, theforgiveness of God and man. 

Our Essex poet, whose beautiful genius has made classical the banks ofhis own Merrimac, shed a romantic light over the early homes andcharacters of New England, and brought back to life the spirit, forms, scenes, and men of the past, has not failed to immortalize, in hisverse, the profound penitence of the misguided but upright judge:--

 "Touching and sad, a tale is told, Like a penitent hymn of the Psalmist old, Of the fast which the good man life-long kept With a haunting sorrow that never slept, As the circling year brought round the time Of an error that left the sting of crime, When he sat on the bench of the witchcraft courts, With the laws of Moses and 'Hale's Reports, ' And spake, in the name of both, the word That gave the witch's neck to the cord, And piled the oaken planks that pressed The feeble life from the warlock's breast! All the day long, from dawn to dawn, His door was bolted, his curtain drawn; No foot on his silent threshold trod, No eye looked on him save that of God, As he baffled the ghosts of the dead with charms Of penitent tears, and prayers, and psalms, And, with precious proofs from the sacred Word Of the boundless pity and love of the Lord, His faith confirmed and his trust renewed, That the sin of his ignorance, sorely rued, Might be washed away in the mingled flood Of his human sorrow and Christ's dear blood!"

SUPPLEMENT. 

SUPPLEMENT. 

 [The subject of Salem Witchcraft has been traced to its conclusion, and discussed within its proper limits, in the foregoing work. But whoever is interested in it as a chapter of history or an exhibition of humanity may feel a curiosity, on some points, that reasonably demands gratification. The questions will naturally arise, Who were the earliest to extricate themselves and the public from the delusion? what is known, beyond the facts mentioned in the progress of the foregoing discussion, of the later fortunes of its prominent actors? what the view taken in the retrospect by individuals and public bodies implicated in the transaction? and what opinions on the general subject have subsequently prevailed? To answer these questions is the design of this Supplement. ]

It can hardly be said that there was any open and avowed opposition inthe community to the proceedings during their early progress. There issome uncertainty and obscurity to what extent there was an unexpresseddissent in the minds of particular private persons. On the generalsubject of the existence and power of the Devil and his agency, moreor less, in influencing human and earthly affairs, it would bedifficult to prove that there was any considerable difference ofopinion. 

The first undisguised and unequivocal opposition to the proceedingswas a remarkable document that has recently come to light. Among somepapers which have found their way to the custody of the EssexInstitute, is a letter, dated "Salisbury, Aug. 9, 1692, " addressed "Tothe worshipful Jonathan Corwin, Esq. , these present at his house inSalem. " It is indorsed, "A letter to my grandfather, on account ofthe condemnation of the witches. " Its date shows that it was writtenwhile the public infatuation and fury were at their height, and theCourt was sentencing to death and sending to the gallows itssuccessive cartloads. There is no injunction of secresy, and noshrinking from responsibility. Although the name of the writer is notgiven in full, he was evidently well known to Corwin, and had writtento him before on the subject. The messenger, in accordance with thesuperscription, undoubtedly delivered it into the hands of the judgeat his residence on the corner of Essex and North Streets. The factthat Jonathan Corwin preserved this document, and placed it in thepermanent files of his family papers, is pretty good proof that heappreciated the weight of its arguments. It is not improbable that heexpressed himself to that effect to his brethren on the bench, andperhaps to others. What he said, and the fact that he was holding sucha correspondence, may have reached the ears of the accusers, and ledthem to commence a movement against him by crying out upon hismother-in-law. 

The letter is a most able argument against the manner in which thetrials were conducted, and, by conclusive logic, overthrows the wholefabric of the evidence on the strength of which the Court wasconvicting and taking the lives of innocent persons. No such piece ofreasoning has come to us from that age. Its author must beacknowledged to have been an expert in dialectic subtleties, and apure reasoner of unsurpassed acumen and force. It requires, but itwill reward, the closest attention and concentration of thought infollowing the threads of the argument. It reaches its conclusions on amost difficult subject with clearness and certainty. It achieves andrealizes, in mere mental processes, quantities, and forces, on thepoints at which it aims, what is called demonstration in mathematicsand geometry. 

The writer does not discredit, but seems to have received, the thenprevalent doctrines relating to the personality, power, and attributesof the Devil; and, from that standpoint, controverts and demolishesthe principles on which the Court was proceeding, in reference to the"spectral evidence" and the credibility of the "afflicted children"generally. The letter, and the formal argument appended to it, arrestnotice in one or two general aspects. There is an appearance of theirhaving proceeded from an elderly person, not at all from any marks ofinfirmity of intellect, but rather from an air of wisdom and a tone ofauthority which can only result from long experience and observation. The circumstance that an amanuensis was employed, and the authorwrites the initials of his signature only, strengthens thisimpression. At the same time, there are indications of a free andprogressive spirit, more likely to have had force at an earlier periodof life. In some aspects, the document indicates a theologicaleducation, and familiarity with matters that belong to the studies ofa minister; in others, it manifests habits of mind and modes ofexpression and reasoning more natural to one accustomed to close legalstatements and deductions. If the production of a trained professionalman of either class, it would justly be regarded as remarkable. If itsauthor belonged to neither class, but was merely a local magistrate, farmer, and militia officer, it becomes more than remarkable. Theremust have been a high development among the founders of our villages, when the laity could present examples of such a capacity to grasp themost difficult subjects, and conduct such acute and abstrusedisquisitions. [See Appendix. ]

The question as to the authorship of this paper may well exciteinterest, involving, as it does, minute critical speculations. Theelements that enter into its solution illustrate the difficulties andperplexities encompassing the study of local antiquities, and attemptsto determine the origin and bearings of old documents or to settleminute points of history. The weight of evidence seems to indicatethat the document is attributable to Major Robert Pike, of Salisbury. Whoever was its author did his duty nobly, and stands alone, above allthe scholars and educated men of the time, in bearing testimonyopenly, bravely, in the very ears of the Court, against thedisgraceful and shocking course they were pursuing. [A]

[Footnote A: The facts and considerations in reference to theauthorship of the letter to Jonathan Corwin may be summarily stated asfollows:--

The letter is signed "R. P. " Under these initials is written, "RobertPain, " in a different hand, and, as the ink as well as the chirographyshows, at a somewhat later date. R. P. Are blotted over, but with inkof such lighter hue that the original letters are clearly discernibleunder it. A Robert Paine graduated at Harvard College, in 1656. But hewas probably the foreman of the grand jury that brought in all theindictments in the witchcraft trials; and therefore could not, fromthe declarations in the letter itself, have been its author. The onlyother person of that name at the time, of whom we have knowledge, washis father, who seems, by the evidence we have, to have died in 1693. (That date is given in the Harvard Triennial for the death of RobertPaine, the graduate; but erroneously, I think, as signatures todocuments, and conveyances of property subsequently, can hardly beascribed to any other person. ) Robert Paine, the father, from theearliest settlement of Ipswich, had been one of the leading men of thetown, apparently of larger property than any other, often its deputyin the General Court, and, for a great length of time, ruling elder ofthe church. "Elder Pain, " or Penn, as the name was often spelled, enjoyed the friendship of John Norton, and all the ministers far andnear; and religious meetings were often held at his house. We knownothing to justify us in saying that he could not have been the authorof this paper; but we also know nothing, except the appearance of hisname upon it, to impute it to him. 

The document is dated from "Salisbury. " So far as we know, Elder Painealways lived in Ipswich; although, having property in the uppercounty, he may have often been, and possibly in his last yearsresided, there. It is, it is true, a strong circumstance, that hisname is written, although by a late hand, under the initials. It showsthat the person who wrote it thought that "R. P. " meant Robert Paine;but any one conversant especially with the antiquities of Ipswich, orthis part of the county, might naturally fall into such a mistake. Theauthorship of documents was often erroneously ascribed. The words"Robert Pain" were, probably, not on the paper when the indorsementwas made, "A letter to my grandfather, " &c. Elder Robert Paine, ifliving in 1692, was ninety-one years of age. The document underconsideration, if composed by him, is truly a marvellousproduction, --an intellectual phenomenon not easily to be paralleled. 

The facts in reference to Robert Pike, of Salisbury, as they bear uponthe question of the authorship of the document, are these: He wasseventy-six years of age in 1692, and had always resided in"Salisbury. " The letter and argument are both in the handwriting ofCaptain Thomas Bradbury, Recorder of old Norfolk County. On thispoint, there can be no question. Bradbury and Pike had beenfellow-townsmen for more than half a century, connected by all theties of neighborhood and family intermarriage, and jointly oralternately had borne all the civic and military honors the peoplecould bestow. The document was prepared and delivered to the judgewhile Mrs. Bradbury was in prison, and just one month before hertrial. Pike, as has been shown (p. 226), was deeply interested in herbehalf. The original signature ("R. P. ") has the marked characteristicsof the same initial letters as found in innumerable autographs of his, on file or record. There are interlineations, beyond question inPike's handwriting. These facts demonstrate that both Pike andBradbury were concerned in producing the document. 

The history of Robert Pike proves that he was a man of great ability, had a turn of mind towards logical exercises, and was, from earlylife, conversant with disputations. Nearly fifty years before, heargued in town-meeting against the propriety, in view of civil andecclesiastical law, of certain acts of the General Court. Theyarraigned, disfranchised, and otherwise punished him for his"litigiousness:" but the weight of his character soon compelled themto restore his political rights; and the people of Salisbury, the verynext year, sent him among them as their deputy, and continued him fromtime to time in that capacity. At a subsequent period, he was theleader and spokesman of a party in a controversy about someecclesiastical affairs, involving apparently certain nice questions oftheology, which created a great stir through the country. The contestreached so high a point, that the church at Salisbury excommunicatedhim; but the public voice demanded a council of churches, whichassembled in September, 1676, and re-instated Major Pike condemninghis excommunication, "finding it not justifiable upon divers grounds. "On this occasion, as before, the General Court frowned upon anddenounced him; but the people came again to his rescue, sending him atthe next election into the House of Deputies, and kept him there untilraised to the Upper House as an Assistant. He was in the practice ofconducting causes in the courts, and was long a local magistrate andone of the county judges. 

He does not appear to have been present at any of the trials orexaminations of 1692; but his official position as Assistant causedmany depositions taken in his neighborhood to be acknowledged andsworn before him. While entertaining the prevalent views aboutdiabolical agency, he always disapproved of the proceedings of theCourt in the particulars to which the arguments of the communicationto Jonathan Corwin apply, --the "spectre evidence, "--and the statementsand actings of "the afflicted children. " There are indications thatsometimes he saw through the folly of the stories told by personswhose depositions he was called to attest. One John Pressy wascirculating a wonderful tale about an encounter he had with thespectre of Susanna Martin. Pike sent for him, and took his deposition. Pressy averred, that, one evening, coming from Amesbury Ferry, he fellin with the shape of Martin in the form of a body of light, which"seemed to be about the bigness of a half-bushel. " After much dodgingand manoeuvring, and being lost and bewildered, wandering to and fro, tumbling into holes, --where, as the deposition states, no "such pitts"were known to exist, --and other misadventures, he came to blows withthe light, and had several brushes with it, striking it with hisstick. At one time, "he thinks he gave her at least forty blows. " Hefinally succeeded in finding "his own house: but, being then seizedwith fear, could not speak till his wife spoke to him at the door, andwas in such a condition that the family was afraid of him; which storybeing carried to the town the next day, it was, upon inquiry, understood, that said Goodwife Martin was in such a miserable case andin such pain that they swabbed her body, as was reported. " Heconcludes his deposition by saying, that Major Pike "seemed to betroubled that this deponent had not told him of it in season that shemight have been viewed to have seen what her ail was. " The affair hadhappened "about twenty-four years ago. " Probably neither Pressy northe Court appreciated the keenness of the major's expression ofregret. It broke the bubble of the deposition. The whole story was theproduct of a benighted imagination, disordered by fear, filled withinebriate vagaries, exaggerated in nightmare, and resting upon wildand empty rumors. Robert Pike's course, in the case of Mrs. Bradbury, harmonizes with the supposition that he was Corwin's correspondent. 

Materials may be brought to light that will change the evidence on thepoint. It may be found that Elder Paine died before 1692: that woulddispose of the question. It may appear that he was living in Salisburyat the time, and acted with Pike and Bradbury, they giving to thepaper the authority of his venerable name and years. But all that isnow known, constrains me to the conclusion stated in the text. ]

William Brattle, an eminent citizen and opulent merchant of Boston, and a gentleman of education and uncommon abilities, wrote a letter toan unknown correspondent of the clerical profession, in October, 1692. It is an able criticism upon the methods of procedure at thetrials, condemning them in the strongest language; but it was aconfidential communication, and not published until many yearsafterwards. He says that "the witches' meetings, the Devil's baptismsand mock sacraments, which the accusing and confessing witches oftspeak of, are nothing else but the effect of their fancy, depraved anddeluded by the Devil, and not a reality to be regarded or minded byany wise man. " He charges the judges with having taken testimony fromthe Devil himself, through witnesses who swore to what they said theDevil communicated to them, thus indirectly introducing the Devil as awitness; and he clinches the accusation by quoting the judgesthemselves, who, when the accusing and confessing witnessescontradicted each other, got over the difficulty by saying that theDevil, in such instances, took away the memory of some of them, forthe moment, obscuring their brains, and misleading them. He sums upthis part of his reasoning in these words: "If it be thus granted thatthe Devil is able to represent false ideas to the imaginations of theconfessors, what man of sense will regard the confessions, or any ofthe words of these confessors?" He says that he knows several persons"about the Bay, "--men, for understanding, judgment, and piety, inferior to few, if any, in New England, --that do utterly condemn thesaid proceedings. He repudiates the idea that Salem was, in any sense, exclusively responsible for the transaction; and affirms that "otherjustices in the country, besides the Salem justices, have issued outtheir warrants;" and states, that, of the eight "judges, commissionedfor this Court at Salem, five do belong to Suffolk County, four ofwhich five do belong to Boston, and therefore I see no reason whyBoston should talk of Salem as though their own judges had had no handin these proceedings in Salem. "

There is one view of the subject, upon which Brattle presses with muchforce and severity. There is ground to suspect, that the proceedingswere suffered to go on, after some of those appearing to countenancethem had ceased to have faith in the accusations. He charges, directly, complicity in the escape of Mrs. Carey, Mrs. English, Captain Alden, Hezekiah Usher, and others, upon the high officials;and says that while the evidence, upon which so many had beenimprisoned, sentenced, and executed, bore against Mrs. Thacher, ofBoston, she was never proceeded against. "She was much complained ofby the afflicted persons, and yet the justices would not issue outtheir warrants to apprehend" her and certain others; while at the verysame time they were issuing, upon no better or other grounds, warrantsagainst so many others. He charges the judges with this most criminalfavoritism. The facts hardly justify such an imputation upon thejudges. They did not, after the trials had begun, it is probable, everissue warrants: that was the function of magistrates. With theexception, perhaps, of Corwin, I think there is no evidence of therehaving been any doubts or misgivings on the bench. It is altogethertoo heavy a charge to bring, without the strongest evidence, upon anyone. To intimate that officials, or any persons, who did not believein the accusations, connived at the escape of their friends andrelatives, and at the same time countenanced, pretended to believe, and gave deadly effect to them when directed against others, issupposing a criminality and baseness too great to be readily admitted. In that wild reign of the worst of passions, this would havetranscended them all in its iniquity. The only excusable people atthat time were those who honestly, and without a doubt, believed inthe guilt of the convicted. Those who had doubts, and did not franklyand fearlessly express them, were the guilty ones. On their hands isthe stain of the innocent blood that was shed. It is not probable, andis scarcely possible, that any considerable number could be at oncedoubters and prosecutors. On this point, Brattle must be understoodto mean, not that judges, or others actively engaged in theprosecutions, warded off proceedings against particular friends orrelatives from a principle of deliberate favoritism, but that thirdparties, actuated by a sycophantic spirit, endeavored to hush up orintercept complaints, when directed too near to the high officials, orthought to gain their favor by aiding the escape of persons in whomthey were interested. 

Brattle uses the same weapon which afterwards the opponents of Mr. Parris, in his church at Salem Village, wielded with such decisiveeffect against him and all who abetted him. It is much to be lamented, that, instead of hiding it under a confidential letter, he did not atthe time openly bring it to bear in the most public and defiantmanner. One brave, strong voice, uttered in the face of the court andin the congregations of the people, echoed from the corners of thestreets, and reaching the ears of the governor and magistrates, denouncing the entire proceedings as the damnable crime of familiaritywith evil spirits, and sorcery of the blackest dye, might perhaps haverecalled the judges, the people, and the rulers to their senses. Ifthe spirit of the ancient prophets of God, of the Quakers of thepreceding age, or of true reformers of any age, had existed in anybreast, the experiment would have been tried. Brattle says, --

 "I cannot but admire that any should go with their distempered friends and relations to the afflicted children, to know what their distempered friends ail, whether they are not bewitched, who it is that afflicts them, and the like. It is true, I know no reason why these afflicted may not be consulted as well as any other, if so be that it was only their natural and ordinary knowledge that was had recourse to: but it is not on this notion that these afflicted children are sought unto, but as they have a supernatural knowledge; a knowledge which they obtain by their holding correspondence with spectres or evil spirits, as they themselves grant. This consulting of these afflicted children, as abovesaid, seems to me to be a very gross evil, a real abomination, not fit to be known in New England; and yet is a thing practised, not only by _Tom_ and _John_, --I mean the rude and more ignorant sort, --but by many who profess high, and pass among us for some of the better sort. This is that which aggravates the evil, and makes it heinous and tremendous; and yet this is not the worst of it, --for, as sure as I now write to you, even some of our civil leaders and spiritual teachers, who, I think, should punish and preach down such sorcery and wickedness, do yet allow of, encourage, yea, and practise, this very abomination. I know there are several worthy gentlemen in Salem who account this practice as an abomination, have trembled to see the methods of this nature which others have used, and have declared themselves to think the practice to be very evil and corrupt. But all avails little with the abettors of the said practice. "

If Mr. Brattle and the "several worthy gentlemen" to whom he alludes, instead of sitting in "trembling" silence, or whispering in privatetheir disapprobation, or writing letters under the injunction ofsecrecy, had come boldly out, and denounced the whole thing, in aspirit of true courage, meeting and defying the risk, and carrying thewar home, and promptly, upon the ministers, magistrates, and judges, they might have succeeded, and exploded the delusion before it hadreached its fatal results. 

He mentions, in the course of his letter, among those persons known byhim to disapprove of the proceedings, --

 "The Hon. Simon Bradstreet, Esq. (our late governor), the Hon. Thomas Danforth, Esq. (our late deputy-governor), the Rev. Mr. Increase Mather, and the Rev. Mr. Samuel Willard. Major N. Saltonstall, Esq. , who was one of the judges, has left the court, and is very much dissatisfied with the proceedings of it. Excepting Mr. Hale, Mr. Noyes, and Mr. Parris, the reverend elders, almost throughout the whole country, are very much dissatisfied. Several of the late justices--viz. , Thomas Graves, Esq. ; N. Byfield, Esq. ; Francis Foxcroft, Esq. --are much dissatisfied; also several of the present justices, and, in particular, some of the Boston justices, were resolved rather to throw up their commissions than be active in disturbing the liberty of Their Majesties' subjects merely on the accusations of these afflicted, possessed children. "

It is to be observed, that the dissatisfaction was with some of themethods adopted in the proceedings, and not with the prosecutionsthemselves. Increase Mather and Samuel Willard signed the paperindorsing Deodat Lawson's famous sermon, which surely drove on theprosecutions; and the former expressed, in print, his approbation ofhis son Cotton's "Wonders of the Invisible World, " in which he laborsto defend the witchcraft prosecutions, and to make it out that thosewho suffered were "malefactors. " Dr. Increase Mather is understood tohave countenanced the burning of Calef's book, some few yearsafterwards, in the square of the public grounds of Harvard College, ofwhich institution he was then president. It cannot be doubted, however, that both the elder Mather and Mr. Willard had expressed, more or less distinctly, their disapprobation of some of the detailsof the proceedings. It is honorable to their memories, and shows thatthe former was not wholly blinded by parental weakness, but willing toexpress his dissent, in some particulars, from the course of hisdistinguished son, and that the latter had an independence ofcharacter which enabled him to criticise and censure a court in whichthree of his parishioners sat as judges. 

Brattle relates a story which seems to indicate that Increase Mathersometimes was unguarded enough to express himself with severityagainst those who gave countenance to the proceedings. "A person fromBoston, of no small note, carried up his child to Salem, near twentymiles, on purpose that he might consult the afflicted about his child, which accordingly he did; and the afflicted told him that his childwas afflicted by Mrs. Carey and Mrs. Obinson. " The "afflicted, " inthis and some other instances, had struck too high. The magistrates inBoston were unwilling to issue a warrant against Mrs. Obinson, andMrs. Carey had fled. All that the man got for his pains, in carryinghis child to Salem, was a hearty scolding from Increase Mather, whoasked him "whether there was not a God in Boston, that he should go tothe Devil, in Salem, for advice. "

Bradstreet's great age prevented, it is to be supposed, his publicappearance in the affair; but his course in a case which occurredtwelve years before fully justifies confidence in the statement ofBrattle. The tradition has always prevailed, that he looked withdisapprobation upon the proceedings, from beginning to end. The courseof his sons, and the action taken against them, is quite decisive tothe point. 

Facts have been stated, which show that Thomas Danforth, if hedisapproved of the proceedings at Salem, in October, must haveundergone a rapid change of sentiments. No irregularities, improprieties, extravagances, or absurdities ever occurred in theexaminations or trials greater than he was fully responsible for inApril. Having, in the mean while, been superseded in office, he hadleisure, in his retirement, to think over the whole matter; and it issatisfactory to find that he saw the error of the ways in which he hadgone himself, and led others. 

The result of the inquiry on this point is, that, while some, outsideof the village, began early to doubt the propriety of the proceedingsin certain particulars, they failed, with the single exception ofRobert Pike, to make manly and seasonable resistance. He remonstratedin a writing signed with his own initials, and while the executionswere going on. He sent it to one of the judges, and did not shrinkfrom having his action known. No other voice was raised, no one elsebreasted the storm, while it lasted. The errors which led to thedelusion were not attacked from any quarter at any time during thatgeneration, and have remained lurking in many minds, in a greater orless degree, to our day. 

There were, however, three persons in Salem Village and its immediatevicinity, who deserve to be for ever remembered in this connection. They resisted the fanaticism at the beginning, and defied its wrath. Joseph Putnam was a little more than twenty-two years of age. Heprobably did not enter into the question of the doctrines thenmaintained on such subjects, but was led by his natural sagacity andindependent spirit to the course he took. In opposition to both hisbrothers and both his uncles, and all the rest of his powerful andextensive family, he denounced the proceedings through and through. Atthe very moment when the excitement was at its most terrible stage, and Mr. Parris held the life of every one in his hands, Joseph Putnamexpressed his disapprobation of his conduct by carrying his infantchild to the church in Salem to be baptized. This was a public andmost significant act. For six months, he kept some one of his horsesunder saddle night and day, without a moment's intermission of theprecaution; and he and his family were constantly armed. It wasunderstood, that, if any one attempted to arrest him, it would be atthe peril of life. If the marshal should approach with overwhelmingforce, he would spring to his saddle, and bid defiance to pursuit. Such a course as this, taken by one standing alone against the wholecommunity to which he belonged, shows a degree of courage, spirit, andresolution, which cannot but be held in honor. 

Martha Corey was an aged Christian professor, of eminently devouthabits and principles. It is, indeed, a strange fact, that, in herhumble home, surrounded, as it then was, by a wilderness, thishusbandman's wife should have reached a height so above and beyond herage. But it is proved conclusively by the depositions adduced againsther, that her mind was wholly disenthralled from the errors of thatperiod. She utterly repudiated the doctrines of witchcraft, andexpressed herself freely and fearlessly against them. The prayer whichthis woman made "upon the ladder, " and which produced such animpression on those who heard it, was undoubtedly expressive ofenlightened piety, worthy of being characterized as "eminent" in itssentiments, and in its demonstration of an innocent heart and life. 

The following paper, in the handwriting of Mr. Parris, is among thecourt-files. It has not the ordinary form of a deposition, but somehowwas sworn to in Court:--

 "The morning after the examination of Goody Nurse, Sam. Sibley met John Procter about Mr. Phillips's, who called to said Sibley as he was going to said Phillips's, and asked how the folks did at the village. He answered, he heard they were very bad last night, but he had heard nothing this morning. Procter replied, he was going to fetch home his jade; he left her there last night, and had rather given forty shillings than let her come up. Said Sibley asked why he talked so. Procter replied, if they were let alone so, we should all be devils and witches quickly; they should rather be had to the whipping-post; but he would fetch his jade home, and thrash the Devil out of her, --and more to the like purpose, crying, 'Hang them! hang them!'"

In another document, it is stated that Nathaniel Ingersoll and othersheard John Procter tell Joseph Pope, "that, if he had John Indian inhis custody, he would soon beat the Devil out of him. "

The declarations thus ascribed to John Procter show that his views ofthe subject were about right; and it will probably be generallyconceded, that the treatment he proposed for Mary Warren and "JohnIndian, " if dealt out to the "afflicted children" generally at theoutset, would have prevented all the mischief. A sound thrashing allround, seasonably administered, would have reached the root of thematter; and the story which has now been concluded of Salem witchcraftwould never have been told. 

When the witchcraft tornado burst upon Andover, it prostrated everything before it. Accusers and accused were counted by scores, andunder the panic of the hour the accused generally confessed. ButAndover was the first to recover its senses. On the 12th of October, 1692, seven of its citizens addressed a memorial to the General Courtin behalf of their wives and children, praying that they might bereleased on bond, "to remain as prisoners in their own houses, wherethey may be more tenderly cared for. " They speak of their "distressedcondition in prison, --a company of poor distressed creatures as fullof inward grief and trouble as they are able to bear up in lifewithal. " They refer to the want of "food convenient" for them, and to"the coldness of the winter season that is coming which may despatchsuch out of the way that have not been used to such hardships, " andrepresent the ruinous effects of their absence from their families, who were at the same time required to maintain them in jail. On the18th of October, the two ministers of Andover, Francis Dane and ThomasBarnard, with twenty-four other citizens of Andover, addressed asimilar memorial to the Governor and General Court, in which we findthe first public expression of condemnation of the proceedings. Theycall the accusers "distempered persons. " They express the opinion thattheir friends and neighbors have been misrepresented. They bear thestrongest testimony in favor of the persons accused, that several ofthem are members of the church in full communion, of blamelessconversation, and "walking as becometh women professing godliness. "They relate the methods by which they had been deluded and terrifiedinto confession, and show the worthlessness of those confessions asevidences against them. They use this bold and significant language:"Our troubles we foresee are likely to continue and increase, if othermethods be not taken than as yet have been; and we know not who canthink himself safe, if the accusations of children and others who areunder a diabolical influence shall be received against persons of goodfame. " On the 2d of January, 1693, the Rev. Francis Dane addressed aletter to a brother clergyman, which is among the files, and wasprobably designed to reach the eyes of the Court, in which hevindicates Andover against the scandalous reports got up by theaccusers, and says that a residence there of forty-four years, andintimacy with the people, enable him to declare that they are notjustly chargeable with any such things as witchcraft, charms, orsorceries of any kind. He expresses himself in strong language: "Hadcharity been put on, the Devil would not have had such an advantageagainst us, and I believe many innocent persons have been accused andimprisoned. " He denounces "the conceit of spectre evidence, " and warnsagainst continuing in a course of proceeding that will procure "thedivine displeasure. " A paper signed by Dudley Bradstreet, FrancisDane, Thomas Barnard, and thirty-eight other men and twelve women ofAndover, was presented to the Court at Salem to the same effect. 

None of the persons named by Brattle can present so strong a claim tothe credit of having opposed the witchcraft fanaticism before theclose of the year 1692, as Francis Dane, his colleague Barnard, andthe citizens of Andover, who signed memorials to the Legislature onthe 18th of October, and to the Court of Trials about the same time. There is, indeed, one conclusive proof that the venerable seniorpastor of the Andover Church made his disapprobation of the witchcraftproceedings known at an earlier period, at least in his immediateneighborhood. The wrath of the accusers was concentrated upon him toan unparalleled extent from their entrance into Andover. They did notventure to attack him directly. His venerable age and commandingposition made it inexpedient; but they struck as near him, and at asmany points, as they dared. They accused, imprisoned, and caused to beconvicted and sentenced to death, one of his daughters, AbigailFaulkner. They accused, imprisoned, and brought to trial another, Elizabeth Johnson. They imprisoned, and brought to the sentence ofdeath, his grand-daughter, Elizabeth Johnson, Jr. They cried outagainst, and caused to be imprisoned, several others of hisgrandchildren. They accused and imprisoned Deliverance the wife, andalso the "man-servant, " of his son Nathaniel. There is reason forsupposing, as has been stated, that Elizabeth How was the wife of hisnephew. Surely, no one was more signalized by their malice andresentment than Francis Dane; and he deserves to be recognized asstanding pre-eminent, and, for a time, almost alone, in bolddenunciation and courageous resistance of the execrable proceedings ofthat dark day. 

Francis Dane made the following statement, also designed to reach theauthorities, which cannot be read by any person of sensibilitywithout feeling its force, although it made no impression upon theCourt at the time:--

 "Concerning my daughter Elizabeth Johnson, I never had ground to suspect her, neither have I heard any other to accuse her, till by spectre evidence she was brought forth; but this I must say, she was weak, and incapacious, fearful, and in that respect I fear she hath falsely accused herself and others. Not long before she was sent for, she spake as to her own particular, that she was sure she was no witch. And for her daughter Elizabeth, she is but simplish at the best; and I fear the common speech, that was frequently spread among us, of their liberty if they would confess, and the like expression used by some, have brought many into a snare. The Lord direct and guide those that are in place, and give us all submissive wills; and let the Lord do with me and mine what seems good in his own eyes!"

There is nothing in the proceedings of the Special Court of Oyer andTerminer more disgraceful than the fact, that the regular Court ofSuperior Judicature, the next year, after the public mind had beenrescued from the delusion, and the spectral evidence repudiated, proceeded to try these and other persons, and, in the face of suchstatements as the foregoing, actually condemned to death ElizabethJohnson, Jr. 

It is remarkable that Brattle does not mention Calef. Theunderstanding has been that they acted in concert, and that Brattlehad a hand in getting up some of Calef's arguments. The silence ofBrattle is not, upon the whole, at all inconsistent with their mutualaction and alliance. As Calef was more perfectly unembarrassed, without personal relations to the clergy and others in high station, and not afraid to stand in the gap, it was thought best to let himtake the fire of Cotton Mather. His name had not been connected withthe matter in the public apprehension. He was a merchant of Boston, and a son of Robert Calef of Roxbury. His attention was called to theproceedings which originated in Salem Village; and his strongfaculties and moral courage enabled him to become the most efficientopponent, in his day, of the system of false reasoning upon which theprosecutions rested. He prepared several able papers in differentforms, in which he discussed the subject with great ability, andtreated Cotton Mather and all others whom he regarded as instrumentalin precipitating the community into the fatal tragedy, with thegreatest severity of language and force of logic, holding up the wholeprocedure to merited condemnation. They were first printed, at London, in 1700, in a small quarto volume, under the title of "More Wonders ofthe Invisible World. " This publication burst like a bomb-shell uponall who had been concerned in promoting the witchcraft prosecutions. Cotton Mather was exasperated to the highest pitch. He says in hisdiary: "He sent this vile volume to London to be published, and thebook is printed; and the impression is, this day week, arrived here. The books that I have sent over into England, with a design to glorifythe Lord Jesus Christ, are not published, but strangely delayed; andthe books that are sent over to vilify me, and render me incapable toglorify the Lord Jesus Christ, --these are published. " Calef's writingsgave a shock to Mather's influence, from which it never recovered. 

Great difficulty has been experienced in drawing the story out in itstrue chronological sequence. The effect produced upon the public mind, when it became convinced that the proceedings had been wrong, andinnocent blood shed, was a universal disposition to bury therecollection of the whole transaction in silence, and, if possible, oblivion. This led to a suppression and destruction of the ordinarymaterials of history. Papers were abstracted from the files, documentsin private hands were committed to the flames, and a chasm left in therecords of churches and public bodies. The journal of the SpecialCourt of Oyer and Terminer is nowhere to be found. Hutchinson appearsto have had access to it. It cannot well be supposed to have been lostby fire or other accident, because the records of the regular Court, up to the very time when the Special Court came into operation, andfrom the time when it expired, are preserved in order. A portion ofthe papers connected with the trials have come down in amiscellaneous, scattered, and dilapidated state, in the offices of theClerk of the Courts in the County of Essex, and of the Secretary ofthe Commonwealth. By far the larger part have been abstracted, ofwhich a few have been deposited, by parties into whose hands they hadhappened to come, with the Massachusetts Historical Society in Bostonand the Essex Institute at Salem. The records of the parish of SalemVillage, although exceedingly well kept before and after 1692 byThomas Putnam, are in another hand for that year, very brief, andmake no reference whatever to the witchcraft transactions. Thisgeneral desire to obliterate the memory of the calamity has nearlyextinguished tradition. It is more scanty and less reliable than onany other event at an equal distance in the past. A subject on whichmen avoided to speak soon died out of knowledge. The localities ofmany very interesting incidents cannot be identified. This is veryobservable, and peculiarly remarkable as to places in the now City ofSalem. The reminiscences floating about are vague, contradictory, andfew in number. In a community of uncommon intelligence, composed, to agreater degree perhaps than almost any other, of families that havebeen here from the first, very inquisitive for knowledge, and alwaysimbued with the historical spirit, it is truly surprising how littlehas been borne down, by speech and memory, in the form of anecdote, personal traits, or local incidents, of this most extraordinary andwonderful occurrence of such world-wide celebrity. Almost all that weknow is gleaned from the offices of the Registry of Deeds andWills. [A]

[Footnote A: As an illustration of the oblivion that had settled overthe details of the transactions and characters connected with thewitchcraft prosecutions, it may be mentioned, that when, thirty-fiveyears ago, I prepared the work entitled 'Lectures on Witchcraft;comprising a History of the Delusion in 1692, ' although professionalengagements prevented my making the elaborate exploration that has nowbeen given to the subject, I extended the investigation over theordinary fields of research, and took particular pains to obtaininformation brought down by tradition, gleaned all that could begathered from the memories of old persons then living of what they hadheard from their predecessors, and sought for every thing that localantiquaries and genealogists could contribute. I find, by the methodsof inquiry adopted in the preparation of the present work, howinadequate and meagre was the knowledge then possessed. Most of thepersons accused and executed, like Giles Corey, his wife Martha, andBridget Bishop, were supposed to have been of humble, if not meancondition, of vagrant habits, and more or less despicable repute. Byfollowing the threads placed in my hands, in the files of thecounty-offices of Registry of Deeds and Wills, and documents connectedwith trials at law, and by a collation of conveyances and theadministration of estates, I find that Corey, however eccentric oropen to criticism in some features of character and passages of hislife, was a large landholder, and a man of singular force andacuteness of intellect; while his wife had an intelligence in advanceof her times, and was a woman of eminent piety. The same is found tohave been the case with most of those who suffered. 

The reader may judge of my surprise in now discovering, that, whilewriting the "Lectures on Witchcraft, " I was owning and occupying apart of the estate of Bridget Bishop, if not actually living in herhouse. The hard, impenetrable, all but petrified oak frame seems toargue that it dates back as far as when she rebuilt and renewed theoriginal structure. Little, however, did I suspect, while deliveringthose lectures in the Lyceum Hall, that we were assembled on the siteof her orchard, the scene of the preternatural and diabolical featscharged upon her by the testimony of Louder and others. Her estate wasone of the most eligible and valuable in the old town, with a front, as has been mentioned, of a hundred feet on Washington Street, andextending along Church Street more than half the distance to St. Peter's Street. At the same time, her husband seems to have had ahouse in the village, near the head of Bass River. It is trulyremarkable, that the locality of the property and residence of aperson of her position, and who led the way among the victims of suchan awful tragedy, should have become wholly obliterated from memoryand tradition, in a community of such intelligence, consisting, in solarge a degree, of old families, tracing themselves back to theearliest generations, and among whom the innumerable descendants ofher seven great-grandchildren have continued to this day. It can onlybe accounted for by the considerations mentioned in the text. Tradition was stifled by horror and shame. What all desired to forgetwas forgotten. The only recourse was in oblivion; and all, sufferersand actors alike, found shelter under it. ]

It is remarkable, that the marshal and sheriff, both quite young men, so soon followed their victims to the other world. Jonathan Walcot, the father of Mary, and next neighbor to Parris, removed from thevillage, and died at Salem in 1699. Thomas Putnam and Ann his wife, the parents of the "afflicted child, " who acted so extraordinary apart in the proceedings and of whom further mention will be made, diedin 1699, --the former on the 24th of May, the latter on the 8th ofJune, --at the respective ages of forty-seven and thirty-eight. [A]There are indications that they saw the errors into which they hadbeen led. If their eyes were at all opened to this view, how terriblemust have been the thought of the cruel wrongs and wide-spread ruin ofwhich they had been the cause! Of the circumstances of their deaths, or their last words and sentiments, we have no knowledge. It is notstrange, that, in addition to all her woes, the death of her husbandwas more than Mrs. Ann Putnam could bear, and that she followed himso soon to the grave. Of the other accusers, we have but littleinformation. Elizabeth Booth was married to Israel Shaw about the year1700. Mary Walcot was married, somewhere between 1692 and 1697, to aperson belonging to Woburn, whose name is torn or worn off from Mr. Parris's records. Of the other "afflicted children" nothing is known, beyond the fact, that the Act of the Legislature of the Province, reversing the judgments, and taking off the attainder from those whowere sentenced to death in 1692, has this paragraph: "Some of theprincipal accusers and witnesses in those dark and severe prosecutionshave since discovered themselves to be persons of profligate andvicious conversation;" and Calef speaks of them as "vile varlets, " andasserts that their reputations were not without spot before, and thatsubsequently they became abandoned to open and shameless vice. 

[Footnote A: The looseness and inaccuracy of persons in reference totheir own ages, in early times, is quite observable. In depositions, they speak of themselves as "about" so many years, or as of so manyyears "or thereabouts. " A variance on this point is often found in thestatements of the same person at different times. Neither are recordsalways to be relied upon as to precision. In the record-book of thevillage church, Mr. Parris enters the age of Mrs. Ann Putnam, at thedate of her admission, June 4, 1691, as "Ann: ætat: 27. " But an"Account of the Early Settlers of Salisbury, " in the "New-EnglandHistorical and Genealogical Register, " vol. Vii. P. 314, gives thedate of her birth "15, 4, 1661. " Her age is stated above according tothis last authority; and, if correct, she was not so young, at thetime of her marriage, as intimated (vol. I. P. 253), but seventeenyears five months and ten days. It is difficult, however, to conceivehow Parris, who was careful about such matters, and undoubtedly hadhis information from her own lips, could have been so far out of theway. Her brother, William Carr, in 1692, deposed that he was thenforty-one years of age or thereabouts; whereas, the "Account of theEarly Settlers of Salisbury, " just referred to, gives the date of hisbirth "15, 1, 1648. " It is indeed singular, that two members of afamily of their standing should have been under an error as to theirown age; one to an extent of almost, the other of some months morethan, three years. ]

A very considerable number of the people left the place. John Shepardand Samuel Sibley sold their lands, and went elsewhere; as did PeterCloyse, who never brought his family to the village after his wife'srelease from prison. Edward and Sarah Bishop sold their estates, andtook up their abode at Rehoboth. Some of the Raymond family removed toMiddleborough. The Haynes family emigrated to New Jersey. No mentionis afterwards found of other families in the record-books. Thedescendants of Thomas and Edward Putnam, in the next generation, weremostly dispersed to other places; but those of Joseph remained on hislands, and have occupied his homestead to this day. It is a singularcircumstance, that some of the spots where, particularly, the greatmischief was brewed, are, and long have been, deserted. Where theparsonage stood, with its barn and garden and well and pathways, isnow a bare and rugged field, without a vestige of its formeroccupancy, except a few broken bricks that mark the site of the house. The same is the case of the homestead of Jonathan Walcot. It was inthese two families that the affair began and was matured. The spotswhere several others, who figured in the proceedings, lived, haveceased to be occupied; and the only signs of former habitation arehollows in the ground, fragments of pottery, and heaps of stonesdenoting the location of cellars and walls. Here and there, wherehouses and other structures once stood, the blight still rests. 

Some circumstances relating to the personal history of those whoexperienced the greatest misery during the prevalence of the dreadfulfanaticism, and were left to mourn over its victims, have happened tobe preserved in records and documents on file. On the 30th ofNovember, 1699, Margaret Jacobs was married to John Foster. Shebelonged to Mr. Noyes's parish; but the recollection of his agency inpushing on proceedings which carried in their train the execution ofher aged grandfather, the exile of her father, the long imprisonmentof her mother and herself, with the prospect of a violent and shamefuldeath hanging over them every hour, and, above all, her own wretchedabandonment of truth and conscience for a while, probably under hispersuasion, made it impossible for her to think of being married byhim. Mr. Greene was known to sympathize with those who had suffered, and the couple went to the village to be united. Some yearsafterwards, when the church of the Middle Precinct, now South Danvers, was organized, John and Margaret Foster, among the first, took theirchildren there for baptism; and their descendants are numerous, inthis neighborhood and elsewhere. Margaret, the widow of John Willard, married William Towne. Elizabeth, the widow of John Procter, married, subsequently to 1696, a person named Richards. Edward Bishop, thehusband of Bridget, a few years afterwards was appointed guardian ofSusannah Mason, the only child of Christian, who was the only child ofBridget by her former husband Thomas Oliver. Bishop seems to haveinvested the money of his ward in the lot at the extreme end ofForrester Street, where it connects with Essex Street, bounded byForrester Street on the north and east, and Essex Street on the south. This was the property of Susannah when she married John Becket, Jr. Bishop appears to have continued his business of a sawyer to a veryadvanced age, and died in Salem, in 1705. 

Sarah Nurse, about two years after her mother's death, married MichaelBowden, of Marblehead; and they occupied her father's house, in thetown of Salem, of which he had retained the possession. His familyhaving thus all been married off, Francis Nurse gave up his homesteadto his son Samuel, and divided his remaining property among his foursons and four daughters. He made no formal deed or will, but drew up apaper, dated Dec. 4, 1694, describing the distribution of the estate, and what he expected of his children. He gave them immediate occupancyand possession of their respective portions. The provision made by theold man for his comfort, and the conditions required of his children, are curious. They give an interesting insight of the life of a ruralpatriarch. He reserved his "great chair and cushion;" a great chest;his bed and bedding; wardrobe, linen and woollen; a pewter pot; onemare, bridle, saddle, and sufficient fodder; the whole of the crop ofcorn, both Indian and English, he had made that year. The childrenwere to discharge all the debts of his estate, pay him fourteen poundsa year, and contribute equally, as much more as might be necessary forhis comfortable maintenance, and also to his "decent burial. " Thelabors of his life had closed. He had borne the heaviest burden thatcan be laid on the heart of a good man. He found rest, and soughtsolace and support, in the society and love of his children and theirfamilies, as he rode from house to house on the road he had opened, bywhich they all communicated with each other. The parish records showthat he continued his interest in its affairs. He lived just longenough to behold sure evidence that justice would be done to thememory of those who suffered, and the authors of the mischief beconsigned to the condemnation of mankind. The tide, upon which Mr. Parris had ridden to the destruction of so many, had turned; and itwas becoming apparent to all, that he would soon be compelled todisappear from his ministry in the village, before the awakeningresentment of the people and the ministers. Francis Nurse died on the22d of November, 1695, seventy-seven years of age. His sons with theirwives, and his daughters with their husbands, went into the ProbateCourt with the paper before described, and unanimously requested thejudge to have the estate divided according to its terms. This isconclusive proof that the father had been just and wise in hisarrangements, and that true fraternal love and harmony pervaded thewhole family. The descendants, under the names of Bowden, Tarbell, andRussell, are dispersed in various parts of the country: those underthe name of Preston, while some have gone elsewhere, have been eversince, and still are, among the most respectable and honored citizensof the village. Some of the name of Nurse have also remained, andworthily represent and perpetuate it. 

I have spoken of the tide's beginning to turn in 1695. Sureindications to that effect were then quite visible. It had begun fardown in the public mind before the prosecutions ceased; but it waslong before the change became apparent on the surface. It was longbefore men found utterance for their feelings. 

Persons living at a distance have been accustomed, and are to thisday, to treat the Salem-witchcraft transaction in the spirit oflightsome ridicule, and to make it the subject of jeers and jokes. Notso those who have lived on, or near, the fatal scene. They have everregarded it with solemn awe and profound sorrow, and shunned themention, and even the remembrance, of its details. This prevented animmediate expression of feeling, and delayed movements in the way ofattempting a reparation of the wrongs that had been committed. Theheart sickened, the lips were dumb, at the very thought of thosewrongs. Reparation was impossible. The dead were beyond its reach. Thesorrows and anguish of survivors were also beyond its reach. The voiceof sympathy was felt to be unworthy to obtrude upon sensibilities thathad been so outraged. The only refuge left for the individuals who hadbeen bereaved, and for the body of the people who realized thatinnocent blood was on all their hands, was in humble and soul-subduedsilence, and in prayers for forgiveness from God and from each other. 

It was long before the public mind recovered from its paralysis. Noone knew what ought to be said or done, the tragedy had been so awful. The parties who had acted in it were so numerous, and of suchstanding, including almost all the most eminent and honored leaders ofthe community from the bench, the bar, the magistracy, the pulpit, themedical faculty, and in fact all classes and descriptions of persons;the mysteries connected with the accusers and confessors; theuniversal prevalence of the legal, theological, and philosophicaltheories that had led to the proceedings; the utter impossibility ofrealizing or measuring the extent of the calamity; and the generalshame and horror associated with the subject in all minds; preventedany open movement. Then there was the dread of rekindling animositieswhich time was silently subduing, and nothing but time could fullyextinguish. Slowly, however, the remembrance of wrongs was becomingobscured. Neighborhood and business relations were graduallyreconciling the estranged. Offices of civility, courtesy, andgood-will were reviving; social and family intimacies and connectionswere taking effect and restoring the community to a natural andsatisfactory condition. Every day, the sentiment was sinking deeper inthe public mind, that something was required to be done to avert thedispleasure of Heaven from a guilty land. But while some were ready toforgive, and some had the grace to ask to be forgiven, any generalmovement in this direction was obstructed by difficulties hard to besurmounted. 

The wrongs committed were so remediless, the outrages upon right, character, and life, had been so shocking, that it was expecting toomuch from the ordinary standard of humanity to demand a generaloblivion. On the other hand, so many had been responsible for them, and their promoters embraced such a great majority of all the leadingclasses of society, that it was impossible to call them to account. Dr. Bentley describes the condition of the community, in some briefand pregnant sentences, characteristic of his peculiar style: "As soonas the judges ceased to condemn, the people ceased to accuse.... Terror at the violence and guilt of the proceedings succeededinstantly to the conviction of blind zeal; and what every man hadencouraged all professed to abhor. Few dared to blame other men, because few were innocent. The guilt and the shame became the portionof the country, while Salem had the infamy of being the place of thetransactions.... After the public mind became quiet, few things weredone to disturb it. But a diminished population, the injury done toreligion, and the distress of the aggrieved, were seen and felt withthe greatest sorrow.... Every place was the subject of some direfultale. Fear haunted every street. Melancholy dwelt in silence in everyplace, after the sun retired. Business could not, for some time, recover its former channels; and the innocent suffered with theguilty. "

While the subject was felt to be too dark and awful to be spoken of, and most men desired to bury it in silence, occasionally theslumbering fires would rekindle, and the flames of animosity burstforth. The recollection of the part he had acted, and the feelings ofmany towards him in consequence, rendered the situation of the sheriffoften quite unpleasant; and the resentment of some broke out in ashameful demonstration at his death, which occurred early in 1697. Mr. English, representing that class who had suffered under his officialhands in 1692, having a business demand upon him, in the shape of asuit for debt, stood ready to seize his body after it was prepared forinterment, and prevented the funeral at the time. The body wastemporarily deposited on the sheriff's own premises. There were, it isprobable, from time to time, other less noticeable occurrencesmanifesting the long continued existence of the unhappy state offeeling engendered in 1692. There were really two parties in thecommunity, generally both quiescent, but sometimes coming into opencollision; the one exasperated by the wrongs they and their friendshad suffered, the other determined not to allow those who had acted inconducting the prosecutions to be called to account for what they haddone. After the lapse of thirty years, and long subsequent to thedeath of Mr. Noyes, Mr. English was prosecuted for having said thatMr. Noyes had murdered Rebecca Nurse and John Procter. 

It has been suggested, that the bearing of the executive officers ofthe law towards the prisoners was often quite harsh. This resultedfrom the general feeling, in which these officials would have beenlikely to sympathize, of the peculiarly execrable nature of the crimecharged upon the accused, and from the danger that might attend themanifestation of any appearance of kindly regard for them. So far asthe seizure of goods is considered, or the exaction of fees, theconduct of the officials was in conformity with usage andinstructions. The system of the administration of the law, comparedwith our times, was stern, severe, and barbarous. The whole tone ofsociety was more unfeeling. Philanthropy had not then extended itsoperations, or directed its notice, to the prison. Sheriff Corwin wasquite a young man, being but twenty-six years of age at the time ofhis appointment. He probably acted under the advice of his relativesand connections on the bench. I think there is no evidence of anyparticular cruelty evinced by him. The arrests, examinations, andimprisonments had taken place under his predecessor, Marshal Herrick, who continued in the service as his deputy. 

That individual, indeed, had justly incurred the resentment of thesufferers and their friends, by eager zeal in urging on theprosecutions, perpetual officiousness, and unwarrantable interferenceagainst the prisoners at the preliminary examinations. The odiumoriginally attached to the marshal seems to have been transferred tohis successor, and the whole was laid at the door of the sheriff. Marshal Herrick does not appear to have been connected with JosephHerrick, who lived on what is now called Cherry Hill, but was a man ofan entirely different stamp. He was thirty-four years of age, and hadnot been very long in the country. John Dunton speaks of meeting himin Salem, in 1686, and describes him as a "very tall, handsome man, very regular and devout in his attendance at church, religious withoutbigotry, and having every man's good word. " His impatient activityagainst the victims of the witchcraft delusion wrought a great changein the condition of this popular and "handsome" man, as is seen in apetition presented by him, Dec. 8, 1692; to "His Excellency SirWilliam Phips, Knight, Captain-general and Governor of TheirMajesties' Territories and Dominions of Massachusetts Bay in NewEngland; and to the Honorable William Stoughton, Esq. , Deputy-Governor; and to the rest of the Honored Council. " It beginsthus: "The petition of your poor servant, George Herrick, most humblyshoweth. " After recounting his great and various services "for theterm of nine months, " as marshal or deputy-sheriff in apprehendingmany prisoners, and conveying them "unto prison and from prison toprison, " he complains that his whole time had been taken up so that hewas incapable of getting any thing for the maintenance of his "poorfamily:" he further states that he had become so impoverished thatnecessity had forced him to lay down his place; and that he mustcertainly come to want, if not in some measure supplied. "Therefore Ihumbly beseech Your Honors to take my case and condition so far intoconsideration, that I may have some supply this hard winter, that Iand my poor children may not be destitute of sustenance, and soinevitably perish; for I have been bred a gentleman, and not much usedto work, and am become despicable in these hard times. " He concludesby declaring, that he is not "weary of serving his king and country, "nor very scrupulous as to the kind of service; for he promises that"if his habitation" could thereby be "graced with plenty in the roomof penury, there shall be no services too dangerous and difficult, butyour poor petitioner will gladly accept, and to the best of my poweraccomplish. I shall wholly lay myself at Your Honorable feet forrelief. " Marshal Herrick died in 1695. 

But, while this feeling was spreading among the people, the governmentwere doing their best to check it. There was great apprehension, that, if allowed to gather force, it would burst over all barriers, that nolimit would be put to its demands for the restoration of propertyseized by the officers of the law, and that it would wreak vengeanceupon all who had been engaged in the prosecutions. Under the influenceof this fear, the following attempt was made to shield the sheriff ofthe county from prosecutions for damages by those whose relatives hadsuffered:--

 "_At a Superior Court of Judicature, Court of Assize, and General Jail Delivery, held at Ipswich, the fifteenth day of May, anno Domini 1694. _--Present, William Stoughton, Esq. , _Chief-justice_; Thomas Danforth, Esq. ; Samuel Sewall, Esq. 

 "This Court, having adjusted the accounts of George Corwin, Esq. , high-sheriff for the county of Essex, do allow the same to be just and true; and that there remains a balance due to him, the said Corwin, of £67. 6_s. _ 4_d. _, which is also allowed unto him; and, pursuant to law, this Court doth fully, clearly, and absolutely acquit and discharge him, the said George Corwin, his heirs, executors, and administrators, lands and tenements, goods and chattels, of and from all manner of sum or sums of money, goods or chattels levied, received, or seized, and of all debts, duties, and demands which are or may be charged in his, the said Corwin's, accounts, or which may be imposed by reason of the sheriff's office, or any thing by him done by virtue thereof, or in the execution of the same, from the time he entered into the said office, to this Court. "

This extraordinary attempt of the Court to close the doors of justicebeforehand against suits for damages did not seem to have any effect;for Mr. English compelled the executors of the sheriff to pay over tohim £60. 3_s_. 

At length, the government had to meet the public feeling. Aproclamation was issued, "By the Honorable the Lieutenant-Governor, Council, and Assembly of His Majesty's province of the MassachusettsBay, in General Court assembled. " It begins thus: "Whereas the angerof God is not yet turned away, but his hand is still stretched outagainst his people in manifold judgments;" and, after severalspecifications of the calamities under which they were suffering, andreferring to the "many days of public and solemn" addresses made toGod, it proceeds: "Yet we cannot but also fear that there is somethingstill wanting to accompany our supplications; and doubtless there aresome particular sins which God is angry with our Israel for, that havenot been duly seen and resented by us, about which God expects to besought, if ever he again turn our captivity. " Thursday, the fourteenthof the next January, was accordingly appointed to be observed as a dayof prayer and fasting, --

 "That so all God's people may offer up fervent supplications unto him, that all iniquity may be put away, which hath stirred God's holy jealousy against this land; that he would show us what we know not, and help us, wherein we have done amiss, to do so no more; and especially, that, whatever mistakes on either hand have been fallen into, either by the body of this people or any orders of men, referring to the late tragedy, raised among us by Satan and his instruments, through the awful judgment of God, he would humble us therefor, and pardon all the errors of his servants and people that desire to love his name; that he would remove the rod of the wicked from off the lot of the righteous; that he would bring in the American heathen, and cause them to hear and obey his voice. 

 "Given at Boston, Dec. 17, 1696, in the eighth year of His Majesty's reign. 

 ISAAC ADDINGTON, _Secretary_. "

The jury had acted in conformity with their obligations and honestconvictions of duty in bringing in their verdicts. They had sworn todecide according to the law and the evidence. The law under which theywere required to act was laid down with absolute positiveness by theCourt. They were bound to receive it, and to take and weigh theevidence that was admitted; and to their minds it was clear, decisive, and overwhelming, offered by persons of good character, and confirmedby a great number of confessions. If it had been within theirprovince, as it always is declared not to be, to discuss the generalprinciples, and sit in judgment on the particular penalties of law, itwould not have altered the case; for, at that time, not only thecommon people, but the wisest philosophers, supported theinterpretation of the law that acknowledged the existence ofwitchcraft, and its sanction that visited it with death. 

Notwithstanding all this, however, so tender and sensitive were theconsciences of the jurors, that they signed and circulated thefollowing humble and solemn declaration of regret for the part theyhad borne in the trials. As the publication of this paper was highlyhonorable to those who signed it, and cannot but be contemplated withsatisfaction by all their descendants, I will repeat their names:--

 "We whose names are underwritten, being in the year 1692 called to serve as jurors in court at Salem, on trial of many who were by some suspected guilty of doing acts of witchcraft upon the bodies of sundry persons, --we confess that we ourselves were not capable to understand, nor able to withstand, the mysterious delusions of the powers of darkness and Prince of the air, but were, for want of knowledge in ourselves and better information from others, prevailed with to take up with such evidence against the accused as, on further consideration and better information, we justly fear was insufficient for the touching the lives of any (Deut. Xvii. 6), whereby we fear we have been instrumental, with others, though ignorantly and unwittingly, to bring upon ourselves and this people of the Lord the guilt of innocent blood; which sin the Lord saith in Scripture he would not pardon (2 Kings xxiv. 4), --that is, we suppose, in regard of his temporal judgments. We do therefore hereby signify to all in general, and to the surviving sufferers in special, our deep sense of, and sorrow for, our errors in acting on such evidence to the condemning of any person; and do hereby declare, that we justly fear that we were sadly deluded and mistaken, --for which we are much disquieted and distressed in our minds, and do therefore humbly beg forgiveness, first, of God, for Christ's sake, for this our error, and pray that God would not impute the guilt of it to ourselves nor others: and we also pray that we may be considered candidly and aright by the living sufferers, as being then under the power of a strong and general delusion, utterly unacquainted with, and not experienced in, matters of that nature. 

 "We do heartily ask forgiveness of you all, whom we have justly offended; and do declare, according to our present minds, we would none of us do such things again, on such grounds, for the whole world, --praying you to accept of this in way of satisfaction for our offence, and that you would bless the inheritance of the Lord, that he may be entreated for the land. 

 "THOMAS FISK, _Foreman_. THOMAS PEARLY, Sr. WILLIAM FISK. JOHN PEABODY. JOHN BACHELER. THOMAS PERKINS. THOMAS FISK, Jr. SAMUEL SAYER. JOHN DANE. ANDREW ELIOT. JOSEPH EVELITH. HENRY HERRICK, Sr. "

In 1697, Rev. John Hale, of Beverly, published a work on the subjectof the witchcraft persecutions, in which he gives the reasons whichled him to the conclusion that there was error at the foundation ofthe proceedings. The following extract shows that he took a rationalview of the subject:--

 "It may be queried then, How doth it appear that there was a going too far in this affair?

 "ANSWER I. --By the number of persons accused. It cannot be imagined, that, in a place of so much knowledge, so many, in so small a compass of land, should so abominably leap into the Devil's lap, --at once. 

 "ANS. II. --The quality of several of the accused was such as did bespeak better things, and things that accompany salvation. Persons whose blameless and holy lives before did testify for them; persons that had taken great pains to bring up _their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord_, such as we had charity for as for our own souls, --and charity is a Christian duty, commended to us in 1 Cor. Xiii. , Col. Iii. 14, and many other places. 

 "ANS. III. --The number of the afflicted by Satan daily increased, till about fifty persons were thus vexed by the Devil. This gave just ground to suspect some mistake. 

 "ANS. IV. --It was considerable, that nineteen were executed, and all denied the crime to the death; and some of them were knowing persons, and had before this been accounted blameless livers. And it is not to be imagined but that, if all had been guilty, some would have had so much tenderness as to seek mercy for their souls in the way of confession, and sorrow for such a sin. 

 "ANS. V. --When this prosecution ceased, the Lord so chained up Satan, that the afflicted grew presently well: the accused are generally quiet, and for five years since we have no such molestation by them. "

Such reasonings as these found their way into the minds of the wholecommunity; and it became the melancholy conviction of all candid andconsiderate persons that innocent blood had been shed. Standing wherewe do, with the lights that surround us, we look back upon the wholescene as an awful perversion of justice, reason, and truth. 

On the 13th of June, 1700, Abigail Faulkner presented a well-expressedmemorial to the General Court, in which she says that her pardon "sofar had its effect, as that I am yet suffered to live, but this onlyas a malefactor convict upon record of the most heinous crimes thatmankind can be supposed to be guilty of;" and prays for "the defacingof the record" against her. She claims it as no more than a simple actof justice; stating that the evidence against her was wholly confinedto the "afflicted, who pretended to see me by their spectral sight, and not with their bodily eyes. " That "the jury (upon only theirtestimony) brought me in 'Guilty, ' and the sentence of death waspassed upon me;" and that it had been decided that such testimony wasof no value. The House of Representatives felt the force of herappeal, and voted that "the prayer of the petitioner be granted. " Thecouncil declined to concur, but addressed "His Excellency to grant thepetitioner His Majesty's gracious pardon; and His Excellency expressedHis readiness to grant the same. " Some adverse influence, it seemed, prevailed to prevent it. 

On the 18th of March, 1702, another petition was presented to theGeneral Court, by persons of Andover, Salem Village, and Topsfield, who had suffered imprisonment and condemnation, and by the relationsof others who had been condemned and executed on the testimony, asthey say, of "possessed persons, " to this effect:--

 "Your petitioners being dissatisfied and grieved that (besides what the condemned persons have suffered in their persons and estates) their names are exposed to infamy and reproach, while their trial and condemnation stands upon public record, we therefore humbly pray this honored Court that something may be publicly done to take off infamy from the names and memory of those who have suffered as aforesaid, that none of their surviving relations nor their posterity may suffer reproach on that account. "

 [Signed by Francis Faulkner, Isaac Easty, Thorndike Procter, and eighteen others. ]

On the 20th of July, in answer to the foregoing petitions, a bill wasordered by the House of Representatives to be drawn up, forbidding infuture such procedures, as in the witchcraft trials of 1692; declaringthat "no spectre evidence may hereafter be accounted valid orsufficient to take away the life or good name of any person or personswithin this province, and that the infamy and reproach cast on thenames and posterity of said accused and condemned persons may in somemeasure be rolled away. " The council concurred with an additionalclause, to acquit all condemned persons "of the penalties to whichthey are liable upon the convictions and judgments in the courts, andestate them in their just credit and reputation, as if no suchjudgment had been had. "

This petition was re-enforced by an "address" to the General Court, dated July 8, 1703, by several ministers of the county of Essex. Theyspeak of the accusers in the witchcraft trials as "young persons underdiabolical molestations, " and express this sentiment: "There is greatreason to fear that innocent persons then suffered, and that God mayhave a controversy with the land upon that account. " They earnestlybeg that the prayer of the petitioners, lately presented, may begranted. This petition was signed by Thomas Barnard, of Andover;Joseph Green, of Salem Village; William Hubbard, John Wise, JohnRogers, and Jabez Fitch, of Ipswich; Benjamin Rolfe, of Haverhill;Samuel Cheever, of Marblehead; Joseph Gerrish, of Wenham; JosephCapen, of Topsfield; Zechariah Symmes, of Bradford; and Thomas Symmes, of Boxford. Francis Dane, of Andover, had died six years before. JohnHale, of Beverly, had died three years before. The great age of JohnHigginson, of Salem, --eighty-seven years, --probably prevented thepapers being handed to him. It is observable, that Nicholas Noyes, hiscolleague, is not among the signers. 

What prevented action, we do not know; but nothing was done. Six yearsafterwards, on the 25th of May, 1709, an "humble address" waspresented to the General Court by certain inhabitants of the province, some of whom "had their near relations, either parents or others, whosuffered death in the dark and doleful times that passed over thisprovince in 1692;" and others "who themselves, or some of theirrelations, were imprisoned, impaired and blasted in their reputationsand estates by reason of the same. " They pray for the passage of a"suitable act" to restore the reputations of the sufferers, and tomake some remuneration "as to what they have been damnified in theirestates thereby. " This paper was signed by Philip English andtwenty-one others. Philip English gave in an account in detail of whatarticles were seized and carried away, at the time of his arrest, fromfour of his warehouses, his wharf, and shop-house, besides theexpenses incurred in prison, and in escaping from it. It appears bythis statement, that he and his wife were nine weeks in jail at Salemand Boston. Nothing was done at this session. The next year, Sept. 12, 1710, Isaac Easty presented a strong memorial to the General Court inreference to his case. He calls for some remuneration. In speaking ofthe arrest and execution of his "beloved wife, " he says "my sorrow andtrouble of heart in being deprived of her in such a manner, which thisworld can never make me any compensation for. " At the same time, thedaughters of Elizabeth How, the son of Sarah Wildes, the heirs of MaryBradbury, Edward Bishop and his wife Sarah, sent in severally similarpetitions, --all in earnest and forcible language. Charles, one of thesons of George Burroughs, presented the case of his "dear and honoredfather;" declaring that his innocence of the crime of which he wasaccused, and his excellence of character, were shown in "his carefulcatechising his children, and upholding religion in his family, andby his solemn and savory written instructions from prison. " Hedescribes in affecting details the condition in which his father'sfamily of little children was left at his death. One of Mr. Burroughs's daughters, upon being required to sign a paper inreference to compensation, expresses her distress of mind in thesewords: "Every discourse on this melancholy subject doth but give afresh wound to my bleeding heart. I desire to sit down in silence. "John Moulton, in behalf of the family of Giles Corey, says that they"cannot sufficiently express their grief" for the death, in such amanner, of "their honored father and mother. " Samuel Nurse, in behalfof his brothers and sisters, says that their "honored and dear motherhad led a blameless life from her youth up.... Her name and the nameof her posterity lies under reproach, the removing of which reproachis the principal thing wherein we desire restitution. And, as we knownot how to express our loss of such a mother in such a way, so we knownot how to compute our charge, but leave it to the judgment of others, and shall not be critical. " He distinctly intimates, that they do notwish any money to be paid them, unless "the attainder is taken off. "Many other petitions were presented by the families of those whosuffered, all in the same spirit; and several besides the Nursesinsisted mainly upon the "taking off the attainder. "

The General Court, on the 17th of October, 1710, passed an act, that"the several convictions, judgments, and attainders be, and herebyare, reversed, and declared to be null and void. " In simple justice, they ought to have extended the act to all who had suffered; but theyconfined its effect to those in reference to whom petitions had beenpresented. The families of some of them had disappeared, or may nothave had notice of what was going on; so that the sentence which theGovernment acknowledged to have been unjust remains to this dayunreversed against the names and memory of Bridget Bishop, SusannaMartin, Alice Parker, Ann Pudeator, Wilmot Read, and Margaret Scott. The stain on the records of the Commonwealth has never been fullyeffaced. What caused this dilatory and halting course on the part ofthe Government, and who was responsible for it, cannot be ascertained. Since the presentation of Abigail Faulkner's petition in 1700, theLegislature, in the popular branch at least, and the Governor, appearto have been inclined to act favorably in the premises; but some powerblocked the way. There is some reason to conjecture that it was theinfluence of the home government. Its consent to have the prosecutionssuspended, in 1692, was not very cordial, but, while it approved of"care and circumspection therein, " expressed reluctance to allow any"impediment to the ordinary course of justice. "

On the 17th of December, 1711, Governor Dudley issued his warrant forthe purpose of carrying out a vote of the "General Assembly, " "by andwith the advice and consent of Her Majesty's Council, " to pay "the sumof £578. 12_s. _" to "such persons as are living, and to those thatlegally represent them that are dead;" which sum was divided asfollows:--

John Procter and wife £150 0 0George Jacobs 79 0 0George Burroughs 50 0 0Sarah Good 30 0 0Giles Corey and wife 21 0 0Dorcas Hoar 21 17 0Abigail Hobbs 10 0 0Rebecca Eames 10 0 0Mary Post 8 14 0Mary Lacy 8 10 0Ann Foster 6 10 0Samuel Wardwell and wife 36 15 0Rebecca Nurse 25 0 0Mary Easty 20 0 0Mary Bradbury 20 0 0Abigail Faulkner 20 0 0John Willard 20 0 0Sarah Wildes 14 0 0Elizabeth How 12 0 0Mary Parker 8 0 0Martha Carrier 7 6 0 ---------- £578 12 0 ==========

The distribution, as above, according to the evidence as it has comedown to us, is as unjust and absurd as the smallness of the amount, and the long delay before it was ordered, are discreditable to theprovince. One of the larger sums was allowed to William Good, while heclearly deserved nothing, as he was an adverse witness in theexamination of his wife, and did what he could to promote theprosecution against her. He did not, it is true, swear that hebelieved her to be a witch; but what he said tended to prejudice themagistrates and the public against her. Benjamin Putnam acted as hisattorney, and received the money for him. Good was a retainer anddependant of that branch of the Putnam family; and its influence gavehim so large a proportionate amount, and not the reason or equity ofthe case. More was allowed to Abigail Hobbs, a very malignant witnessagainst the prisoners, than to the families of several who wereexecuted. Nearly twice as much was allowed for Abigail Faulkner, whowas pardoned, as for Elizabeth How, who was executed. The sums allowedin the cases of Parker, Carrier, and Foster, were shamefully small. The public mind evidently was not satisfied; and the Legislature werepressed for a half-century to make more adequate compensation, andthereby vindicate the sentiment of justice, and redeem the honor ofthe province. 

On the 8th of December, 1738, Major Samuel Sewall, a son of the Judge, introduced an order in the House of Representatives for theappointment of a committee to get information relating to "thecircumstances of the persons and families who suffered in the calamityof the times in and about the year 1692. " Major Sewall entered intothe matter with great zeal. The House unanimously passed the order. Hewas chairman of the committee; and, on the 9th of December, wrote tohis cousin Mitchel Sewall in Salem, son of Stephen, earnestlyrequesting him and John Higginson, Esq. , to aid in accomplishing theobject. The following is an extract from a speech delivered byGovernor Belcher to both Houses of the Legislature, Nov. 22, 1740. Itis honorable to his memory. 

 "The Legislature have often honored themselves in a kind and generous remembrance of such families and of the posterity of such as have been sufferers, either in their persons or estates, for or by the Government, of which the public records will give you many instances. I should therefore be glad there might be a committee appointed by this Court to inquire into the sufferings of the people called Quakers, in the early days of this country, as also into the descendants of such families as were in a manner ruined in the mistaken management of the terrible affair called witchcraft. I really think there is something incumbent on this Government to be done for relieving the estates and reputations of the posterities of the unhappy families that so suffered; and the doing it, though so long afterwards, would doubtless be acceptable to Almighty God, and would reflect honor upon the present Legislature. "

On the 31st of May, 1749, the heirs of George Burroughs addressed apetition to Governor Shirley and the General Court, setting forth "theunparalleled persecutions and sufferings" of their ancestor, andpraying for "some recompense from this Court for the losses therebysustained by his family. " It was referred to a committee of bothHouses. The next year, the petitioners sent a memorial to GovernorSpencer Phips and the General Court, stating, that "it hath fell out, that the Hon. Mr. Danforth, chairman of the said committee, had not, as yet, called them together so much as once to act thereon, even tothis day, as some of the honorable committee themselves were pleased, with real concern, to signify to your said petitioners. " The Houseimmediately passed this order: "That the committee within referred tobe directed to sit forthwith, consider the petition to them committed, and report as soon as may be. "

All that I have been able to find, as the result of these long-delayedand long-protracted movements, is a statement of Dr. Bentley, that theheirs of Philip English received two hundred pounds. He does not saywhen the act to this effect was passed. Perhaps some general measureof the kind was adopted, the record of which I have failed to meet. The engrossing interest of the then pending French war, and of thevehement dissensions that led to the Revolution, probably preventedany further attention to this subject, after the middle of the lastcentury. 

It is apparent from the foregoing statements and records, that whilemany individuals, the people generally, and finally Governor Belcherand the House of Representatives emphatically, did what they could, there was an influence that prevailed to prevent for a long time, ifnot for ever, any action of the province to satisfy the demands madeby justice and the honor of the country in repairing the great wrongscommitted by the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of theGovernment in 1692. The only bodies of men who fully came up to theirduty on the occasion were the clergy of the county, and, as willappear, the church at Salem Village. 

What was done by the First Church in Salem is shown in the followingextract from its records:--

 "March 2, 1712. --After the sacrament, a church-meeting was appointed to be at the teacher's house, at two of the clock in the afternoon, on the sixth of the month, being Thursday: on which day they accordingly met to consider of the several following particulars propounded to them by the teacher; viz. :--

 "1. Whether the record of the excommunication of our Sister Nurse (all things considered) may not be erased and blotted out. The result of which consideration was, That whereas, on July 3d, 1692, it was proposed by the Elders, and consented to by an unanimous vote of the church, that our Sister Nurse should be excommunicated, she being convicted of witchcraft by the Court, and she was accordingly excommunicated, since which the General Court having taken off the attainder, and the testimony on which she was convicted being not now so satisfactory to ourselves and others as it was generally in that hour of darkness and temptation; and we being solicited by her son, Mr. Samuel Nurse, to erase and blot out of the church records the sentence of her excommunication, --this church, having the matter proposed to them by the teacher, and having seriously considered it, doth consent that the record of our Sister Nurse's excommunication be accordingly erased and blotted out, that it may no longer be a reproach to her memory, and an occasion of grief to her children. Humbly requesting that the merciful God would pardon whatsoever sin, error, or mistake was in the application of that censure and of that whole affair, through our merciful High-priest, who knoweth how to have compassion on the ignorant, and those that are out of the way. 

 "2. It was proposed whether the sentence of excommunication against our Brother Giles Corey (all things considered) may not be erased and blotted out. The result was, That whereas, on Sept. 18, 1692, it was considered by the church, that our Brother Giles Corey stood accused of and indicted for the sin of witchcraft, and that he had obstinately refused to plead, and so threw himself on certain death. It was agreed by the vote of the church, that he should be excommunicated for it; and accordingly he was excommunicated. Yet the church, having now testimony in his behalf, that, before his death, he did bitterly repent of his obstinate refusal to plead in defence of his life, do consent that the sentence of his excommunication be erased and blotted out. "

It will be noticed that these proceedings were not had at a regularpublic meeting, but at a private meeting of the church, on a week-dayafternoon, at the teacher's house. The motives that led to them were adisposition to comply with the act of the General Court, and thesolicitations of Mr. Samuel Nurse, rather than a profound sense ofwrong done to a venerable member of their own body, who had claimsupon their protection as such. The language of the record does notfrankly admit absolutely that there was sin, error, or mistake, butrequests forgiveness for whatsoever there may have been. The characterof Rebecca Nurse, and the outrageous treatment she had received fromthat church, in the method arranged for her excommunication, demandedsomething more than these hypothetical expressions, with such apreamble. 

The statement made in the vote about Corey is, on its face, amisrepresentation. From the nature of the proceeding by which he wasdestroyed, it was in his power, at any moment, if he "repented of hisobstinate refusal to plead, " by saying so, to be instantly releasedfrom the pressure that was crushing him. The only design of thetorture was to make him bring it to an end by "answering" guilty, ornot guilty. Somebody fabricated the slander that Corey's resolutionbroke down under his agonies, and that he bitterly repented; and Mr. Noyes put the foolish scandal upon the records of the church. 

The date of this transaction is disreputable to the people of Salem. Twenty years had been suffered to elapse, and a great outrage allowedto remain unacknowledged and unrepented. The credit of doing what wasdone at last probably belongs to the Rev. George Corwin. His call tothe ministry, as colleague with Mr. Noyes, had just been consummated. The introduction of a new minister heralded a new policy, and theproceedings have the appearance of growing out of the kindly andauspicious feelings which generally attend and welcome such an era. 

The Rev. George, son of Jonathan Corwin, was born May 21, 1683, andgraduated at Harvard College in 1701. Mr. Barnard, of Marblehead, describes his character: "The spirit of early devotion, accompaniedwith a natural freedom of thought and easy elocution, a quickinvention, a solid judgment, and a tenacious memory, laid thefoundation of a good preacher; to which his acquired literature, hisgreat reading, hard studies, deep meditation, and close walk with God, rendered him an able and faithful minister of the New Testament. " Therecords of the First Church, in noticing his death, thus speak of him:"He was highly esteemed in his life, and very deservedly lamented athis death; having been very eminent for his early improvement inlearning and piety, his singular abilities and great labors, hisremarkable zeal and faithfulness. He was a great benefactor to ourpoor. " Those bearing the name of Curwen among us are his descendants. He died Nov. 23, 1717. 

The Rev. Nicholas Noyes died Dec. 13, 1717. He was a person ofsuperior talents and learning. He published, with the sermon preachedby Cotton Mather on the occasion, a poem on the death of his venerablecolleague, Mr. Higginson, in 1708; and also a poem on the death ofRev. Joseph Green, in 1715. Although an amiable and benevolent man inother respects, it cannot be denied that he was misled by his errorsand his temperament into the most violent course in the witchcraftprosecutions; and it is to be feared that his feelings were neverwholly rectified in reference to that transaction. 

Jonathan, the father of the Rev. George Corwin, and whose part as amagistrate and judge in the examinations and trials of 1692 has beenseen, died on the 9th of July, 1718, seventy-eight years of age. 

It only remains to record the course of the village church and peoplein reference to the events of 1692. After six persons, includingRebecca Nurse, had suffered death; and while five others, GeorgeBurroughs, John Procter, John Willard, George Jacobs, and MarthaCarrier, were awaiting their execution, which was to take place on thecoming Friday, Aug. 19, --the facts, related as follows by Mr. Parrisin his record-book, occurred:--

 "Sabbath-day, 14th August, 1692. --The church was stayed after the congregation was dismissed, and the pastor spake to the church after this manner:--

 "'Brethren, you may all have taken notice, that, several sacrament days past, our brother Peter Cloyse, and Samuel Nurse and his wife, and John Tarbell and his wife, have absented from communion with us at the Lord's Table, yea, have very rarely, except our brother Samuel Nurse, been with us in common public worship: now, it is needful that the church send some persons to them to know the reason of their absence. Therefore, if you be so minded, express yourselves. '

 "None objected. But a general or universal vote, after some discourse, passed, that Brother Nathaniel Putnam and the two deacons should join with the pastor to discourse with the said absenters about it. 

 "31st August. --Brother Tarbell proves sick, unmeet for discourse; Brother Cloyse hard to be found at home, being often with his wife in prison at Ipswich for witchcraft; and Brother Nurse, and sometimes his wife, attends our public meeting, and he the sacrament, 11th September, 1692: upon all which we choose to wait further. "

When it is remembered that the individuals aimed at all belonged tothe family of Rebecca Nurse, whose execution had taken place threeweeks before under circumstances with which Mr. Parris had been soprominently and responsibly connected, this proceeding must be felt byevery person of ordinary human sensibilities to have been cruel, barbarous, and unnatural. Parris made the entry in his book, as heoften did, some time after the transaction, as the inserted date ofSept. 11, shows. What his object was in commencing disciplinarytreatment of this distressed family is not certain. It may be that hewas preparing to get up such a feeling against them as would make itsafe to have the "afflicted" cry out upon some of them. Or it may bethat he wished to get them out of his church, to avoid the possibilityof their proceeding against him, by ecclesiastical methods, at somefuture day. He could not, however, bring his church to continue theprocess. This is the first indication that the brethren were no longerto be relied on by him to go all lengths, and that some remnants ofgood feeling and good sense were to be found among them. 

But Mr. Parris was determined not to allow the public feeling againstpersons charged with witchcraft to subside, if he could help it; andhe made one more effort to renew the vehemence of the prosecutions. Heprepared and preached two sermons, on the 11th of September, from thetext, Rev. Xvii. 14: "These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lambshall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings; andthey that are with him are called and chosen and faithful. " They areentitled, "The Devil and his instruments will be warring againstChrist and his followers. " This note is added, "After the condemnationof six witches at a court at Salem, one of the witches, viz. , MarthaCorey, in full communion with our church. " The following is a portionof "the improvement" in the application of these discourses:--

 "It may serve to reprove such as seem to be so amazed at the war the Devil has raised amongst us by wizards and witches, against the Lamb and his followers, that they altogether deny it. If ever there were witches, men and women in covenant with the Devil, here are multitudes in New England. Nor is it so strange a thing that there should be such; no, nor that some church-members should be such. Pious Bishop Hall saith, 'The Devil's prevalency in this age is most clear in the marvellous number of witches abounding in all places. Now hundreds (says he) are discovered in one shire; and, if fame deceive us not, in a village of fourteen houses in the north are found so many of this damned brood. Heretofore, only barbarous deserts had them; but now the civilized and religious parts are frequently pestered with them. Heretofore, some silly, ignorant old woman, &c. ; but now we have known those of both sexes who professed much knowledge, holiness, and devotion, drawn into this damnable practice. '"

The foregoing extract is important as showing that some persons at thevillage had begun to express their disbelief of the witchcraftdoctrine of Mr. Parris, "altogether denying it. " The title and driftof the sermons in connection with the date, and his proceedings, themonth before, against Samuel Nurse, Tarbell, and Cloyse, members ofhis church, give color to the idea that he was designing to have them"cried out" against, and thus disposed of. It is a noticeable fact, that, about this time, Cotton Mather was also laying his plans for arenewal, or rather continuance, of witchcraft prosecutions. Nine daysafter these sermons were preached by Parris, Mather wrote thefollowing letter to Stephen Sewall of Salem:--

 BOSTON, Sept. 20, 1692. 

 MY DEAR AND MY VERY OBLIGING STEPHEN, --It is my hap to be continually ... With all sorts of objections, and objectors against the ... Work now doing at Salem; and it is my further good hap to do some little service for God and you in my encounters. 

 But that I may be the more capable to assist in lifting up a standard against the infernal enemy, I must renew my most importunate request, that you would please quickly to perform what you kindly promised, of giving me a narrative of the evidences given in at the trials of half a dozen, or if you please a dozen, of the principal witches that have been condemned. I know 'twill cost you some time; but, when you are sensible of the benefit that will follow, I know you will not think much of that cost; and my own willingness to expose myself unto the utmost for the defence of my friends with you makes me presume to plead something of merit to be considered. 

 I shall be content, if you draw up the desired narrative by way of letter to me; or, at least, let it not come without a letter, wherein you shall, if you can, intimate over again what you have sometimes told me of the awe which is upon the hearts of your juries, with ... Unto the validity of the spectral evidences. 

 Please also to ... Some of your observations about the confessors and the credibility of what they assert, or about things evidently preternatural in the witchcrafts, and whatever else you may account an entertainment, for an inquisitive person, that entirely loves you and _Salem_. Nay, though I will never lay aside the character which I mentioned in my last words, yet I am willing, that, when you write, you should imagine me as obstinate a Sadducee and witch-advocate as any among us: address me as one that believed nothing reasonable; and when you have so knocked me down, in a spectre so unlike me, you will enable me to box it about among my neighbors, till it come--I know not where at last. 

 But assure yourself, as I shall not wittingly make what you write prejudicial to any worthy design which those two excellent persons, Mr. Hale and Mr. Noyse, may have in hand; so you shall find that I shall be, sir, your grateful friend, C. MATHER. 

 P. S. --That which very much strengthens the charms of the request which this letter makes you is, that His Excellency the Governor laid his positive commands upon me to desire this favor of you; and the truth is, there are some of his circumstances with reference to this affair, which I need not mention, that call for the expediting of your kindness, --_kindness_, I say, for such it will be esteemed as well by him as by your servant, C. MATHER. 

In order to understand the character and aim of this letter, it willbe necessary to consider its date. It was written Sept. 20, 1692. Onthe 19th of August, but one month before, Dr. Mather was acting aconspicuous part under the gallows at Witch-hill, at the execution ofMr. Burroughs and four others, increasing the power of the awfuldelusion, and inflaming the passions of the people. On the 9th ofSeptember, six more miserable creatures received sentence of death. Onthe 17th of September, nine more received sentence of death. On the19th of September, Giles Corey was crushed to death. And, on the 22dof September, eight were executed. These were the last that suffereddeath. The letter, therefore, was written while the horrors of thetransaction were at their height, and by a person who had himself beena witness of them, and whose "good hap" it had been to "do some littleservice" in promoting them. The object of the writer is declared tobe, that he might be "more capable to assist in lifting up a standardagainst the infernal enemy. " The literal meaning of this expressionis, that he might be enabled to get up another witchcraft delusionunder his own special management and control. Can any thing beimagined more artful and dishonest than the plan he had contrived tokeep himself out of sight in all the operations necessary toaccomplish his purpose? "Nay, though I will never lay aside thecharacter which I mentioned in my last words, yet I am willing, that, when you write, you should imagine me as obstinate a Sadducee andwitch-advocate as any among us: address me as one that believednothing reasonable; and when you have so knocked me down, in a spectreso unlike me, you will enable me to box it about among my neighbors, till it come--I know not where at last. "

Upon obtaining the document requisite to the fulfilment of his design, he did "box it about" so effectually among his neighbors, that hesucceeded that next summer in getting up a wonderful case ofwitchcraft, in the person of one Margaret Rule, a member of hiscongregation in Boston. Dr. Mather published an account of herlong-continued fastings, even unto the ninth day, and of theincredible sufferings she endured from the "infernal enemy. " "She wasthrown, " says he, "into such exorbitant convulsions as wereastonishing to the spectators in general. They that could behold thedoleful condition of the poor family without sensible compassionsmight have entrails, indeed, but I am sure they could have no truebowels in them. " So far was he successful in spreading the delusion, that he prevailed upon six men to testify that they had seen MargaretRule lifted bodily from her bed, and raised by an invisible power "soas to touch the garret floor;" that she was entirely removed from thebed or any other material support; that she continued suspended forseveral minutes; and that a strong man, assisted by several otherpersons, could not effectually resist the mysterious force that liftedher up, and poised her aloft in the air! The people of Boston weresaved from the horrors intended to be brought upon them by this darkand deep-laid plot, by the activity, courage, and discernment of Calefand others, who distrusted Dr. Mather, and, by watching his movements, exposed the imposture, and overthrew the whole design. 

Mr. Parris does not appear to have produced much effect by hissermons. The people had suffered enough from the "war between theDevil and the Lamb, " as he and Mather had conducted it; and it couldnot be renewed. 

Immediately upon the termination of the witchcraft proceedings, thecontroversy between Mr. Parris and the congregation, or theinhabitants, as they were called, of the village, was renewed, withearnest resolution on their part to get rid of him. The parishneglected and refused to raise the means for paying his salary; and amajority of the voters, in the meetings of the "inhabitants, "vigilantly resisted all attempts in his favor. The church was stillcompletely under his influence; and, as has been stated in the FirstPart, he made use of that body to institute a suit against the people. The court and magistrates were wholly in his favor, and peremptorilyordered the appointment, by the people, of a new committee. Theinhabitants complied with the order by the election of a newcommittee, but took care to have it composed exclusively of menopposed to Mr. Parris; and he found himself no better off than before. He concluded not to employ his church any longer as a principal agentin his lawsuit against the parish; but used it for another purpose. 

After the explosion of the witchcraft delusion, the relations ofparties became entirely changed. The prosecutors at the trials wereput on the defensive, and felt themselves in peril. Parris saw hisdanger, and, with characteristic courage and fertility of resources, prepared to defend himself, and carry the war upon any quarter fromwhich an attack might be apprehended. He continued, on his ownresponsibility, to prosecute, in court, his suit against the parish, and in his usual trenchant style. As the law then was, a minister, ina controversy with his parish, had a secure advantage, and absolutelycommanded the situation, if his church were with him. From the time ofhis settlement, Parris had shaped his policy on this basis. He hadsought to make his church an impregnable fortress against hisopponents. But, to be impregnable, it was necessary that there shouldbe no enemies within it. A few disaffected brethren could at any timedemand, and have a claim to, a mutual council; and Mr. Parris knew, that, before the investigations of such a council, his actions in thewitchcraft prosecutions could not stand. This perhaps suggested hismovements, in August, 1692, against Samuel Nurse, John Tarbell, andPeter Cloyse. He did not at that time succeed in getting rid of them;and they remained in the church, and, with the exception of Cloyse, inthe village. They might at any time take the steps that would lead toa mutual council; and Mr. Parris was determined, at all events, toprevent that. It was evident that the members of that family wouldinsist upon satisfaction being given them, in and through the church, for the wrongs he had done them. Although, in the absence of Cloyse, but two in number, there was danger that sympathy for them might reachothers of the brethren. Thomas Wilkins, a member in good standing, sonof old Bray Wilkins, and a connection of John Willard, an intelligentand resolute man, had already joined them. Parris felt that othersmight follow, and that whatever could be done to counteract them mustbe done quickly. He accordingly initiated proceedings in his church torid himself of them, if not by excommunication, at least by gettingthem under discipline, so as to prevent the possibility of theirdealing with him. 

This led to one of the most remarkable passages of the kind in theannals of the New-England churches. It is narrated in detail by Mr. Parris, in his church record-book. It would not be easy to findanywhere an example of greater skill, wariness, or ability in aconflict of this sort. On the one side is Mr. Parris, backed by hischurch and the magistrates, and aided, it is probable, by Mr. Noyes;on the other, three husbandmen. They had no known backers or advisers;and, at frequent stages of the fencing match, had to parry or strike, without time to consult any one. Mr. Parris was ingenious, quick, agreat strategist, and not over-scrupulous as to the use of hisweapons. Nurse, Tarbell, and Wilkins were cautious, cool, steady, andpersistent. Of course, they were wholly inexperienced in such things, and liable to make wrong moves, or to be driven or drawn to untenableground. But they will not be found, I think, to have taken a falsestep from beginning to end. Their line of action was extremely narrow. It was necessary to avoid all personalities, and every appearance ofpassion or excitement; to make no charge against Mr. Parris that couldtouch the church, as such, or reflect upon the courts, magistrates, orany others that had taken part in the prosecutions. It was necessaryto avoid putting any thing into writing, with their names attached, which could in any way be tortured into a libel. Parris lets fallexpressions which show that he was on the watch for something of thekind to seize upon, to transfer the movement from the church to thecourts. Entirely unaccustomed to public speaking, these three farmershad to meet assemblages composed of their opponents, and much wroughtup against them; to make statements, and respond to interrogatoriesand propositions, the full and ultimate bearing of which was notalways apparent: any unguarded expression might be fatal to theircause. Their safety depended upon using the right word at the righttime and in the right manner, and in withholding the statement oftheir grievances, in adequate force of language, until they were underthe shelter of a council. If, during the long-protracted conferencesand communications, they had tripped at any point, allowed a phrase orsyllable to escape which might be made the ground of discipline orcensure, all would be lost; for Parris could not be reached butthrough a council, and a council could not even be asked for except bybrethren in full and clear standing. It was often attempted to ensnarethem into making charges against the church; but they kept their eyeon Parris, and, as they told him more than once in the presence of thewhole body of the people, on him alone. Limited as the ground was onwhich they could stand, they held it steadfastly, and finally drovehim from his stronghold. 

On the first movement of Mr. Parris offensively upon them, theycommenced their movement upon him. The method by which alone theycould proceed, according to ecclesiastical law and the platform ofthe churches, was precisely as it was understood to be laid down inMatt. Xviii. 15-17. Following these directions, Samuel Nurse firstcalled alone upon Mr. Parris, and privately made known his grievances. Parris gave him no satisfaction. Then, after a due interval, Nurse, Tarbell, and Wilkins called upon him together. He refused to see themtogether, but one at a time was allowed to go up into his study. Tarbell and Nurse each spent an hour or more with him, leaving no timefor Wilkins. In these interviews, he not only failed to givesatisfaction, but, according to his own account, treated them in thecoolest and most unfeeling manner, not allowing himself to utter asoothing word, but actually reiterating his belief of the guilt oftheir mother; telling them, as he says, "that he had not seensufficient grounds to vary his opinion. " Cloyse came soon after to thevillage, and had an interview with him for the same purpose. Parrissaw them one only at a time, in order to preclude their taking thesecond step required by the gospel rule; that is, to have a brother ofthe church with them as a witness. He also took the ground that theycould not be witnesses for each other, but that he should treat themall as only one person in the transaction. A sense of the injustice ofhis conduct, or some other consideration, led William Way, another ofthe brethren, to go with them as a witness. Nurse, Tarbell, Wilkins, Cloyse, and Way went to his house together. He said that the fourfirst were but one person in the case; but admitted that Way was adistinct person, a brother of accredited standing, and a witness. Heescaped, however, under the subterfuge that the gospel rule required"two or _three_ witnesses. " In this way, the matter stood for sometime; Parris saying that they had not complied with the conditions inMatt. Xviii. , and they maintaining that they had. 

The course of Parris was fast diminishing his hold upon the publicconfidence. It was plain that the disaffected brethren had done whatthey could, in an orderly way, to procure a council. At length, theleading clergymen here and in Boston, whose minds were open to reason, thought it their duty to interpose their advice. They wrote to Parris, that he and his church ought to consent to a council. They wrote asecond time in stronger terms. Not daring to quarrel with so large aportion of the clergy, Parris pretended to comply with their advice, but demanded a majority of the council to be chosen by him and hischurch. The disaffected brethren insisted upon a fair, mutual council;each party to have three ministers, with their delegates, in it. Tothis, Parris had finally to agree. The dissatisfied brethren named, asone of their three, a church at Ipswich. Parris objected to theIpswich church. The dissenting brethren insisted that each side shouldbe free to select its respective three churches. Parris was notwilling to have Ipswich in the council. The other party insisted, andhere the matter hung suspended. The truth is, that the disaffectedbrethren were resolved to have the Rev. John Wise in the council. Theyknew Cotton Mather would be there, on the side of Parris; and theyknew that John Wise was the man to meet him. The public opinionsettled down in favor of the dissatisfied brethren, on the ground thateach party to a mutual council ought to--and, to make it reallymutual, must--have free and full power to nominate the churches to becalled by it. Parris, being afraid to have a mutual council, andparticularly if Mr. Wise was in it, suddenly took a new position. Heand his church called an _ex parte_ council, at which the followingministers, with their delegates, were present: Samuel Checkley of theNew South Church, James Allen of the First Church, Samuel Willard ofthe Old South, Increase and Cotton Mather of the North Church, --all ofBoston; Samuel Torrey of Weymouth; Samuel Phillips of Rowley, andEdward Payson, also of Rowley. Among the delegates were many of theleading public men of the province. The result was essentiallydamaging to Mr. Parris. The tide was now strongly set against him. TheBoston ministers advised him to withdraw from the contest. Theyprovided a settlement for him in Connecticut, and urged him to quitthe village, and go there. But he refused, and prolonged the struggle. In the course of it, papers were drawn up and signed, one by hisfriends, another by his opponents, together embracing nearly all themen and women of the village. Those who did not sign either paper wereunderstood to sympathize with the disaffected brethren. Many whosigned the paper favorable to him acted undoubtedly from the motivestated in the heading; viz. , that the removal of Mr. Parris could dono good, "for we have had three ministers removed already, and byevery removal our differences have been rather aggravated. " Anotherremoval, they thought, would utterly ruin them. They do not expressany particular interest in Mr. Parris, but merely dread anotherchange. They preferred to bear the ills they had, rather than fly toothers that they knew not of. It is a very significant fact, thatneither Mrs. Ann Putnam nor the widow Sarah Houlton signed eitherpaper (the Sarah Houlton whose name appears was the wife of JosephHoulton, Sr. ). There is reason to believe that they regretted the partthey had taken, particularly against Rebecca Nurse, and probably didnot feel over favorably to the person who had led them into theirdreadful responsibility. 

In the mean time, the controversy continued to wax warm among thepeople. Mr. Parris was determined to hold his place, and, with it, theparsonage and ministry lands. The opposition was active, unappeasable, and effective. The following paper, handed about, illustrates themethods by which they assailed him:--

 "As to the contest between Mr. Parris and his hearers, &c. , it may be composed by a satisfactory answer to Lev. Xx. 6: 'And the soul that turneth after such as have familiar spirits, and after wizards, to go a-whoring after them, I will set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people. ' 1 Chron. X. 13, 14: 'So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the Lord, --even against the word of the Lord, which he kept not, --and also for asking counsel of one who had a familiar to inquire of it, and inquired not of the Lord: therefore he slew him, '" &c. 

Mr. Parris mirrored, or rather daguerrotyped, his inmost thoughts uponthe page of his church record-book. Whatever feeling happened toexercise his spirit, found expression there. This gives it a trulyrare and singular interest. Among a variety of scraps variegating therecord, and thrown in with other notices of deaths, he has thefollowing:--

 "1694, Oct. 27. --Ruth, daughter to Job Swinnerton (died), and buried the 28th instant, being the Lord's Day; and the corpse carried by the meeting-house door in time of singing before meeting afternoon, and more at the funeral than at the sermon. "

This illustrates the state of things. The Swinnerton family were allalong opposed to Mr. Parris, and kept remarkably clear from thewitchcraft delusion. Originally, it was not customary to have prayersat funerals. At any rate, all that Mr. Parris had to do on theoccasion was to witness and record the fact, which he indites in thepithy manner in which he often relieves his mind, that more peoplewent to the distant burial-ground than came to hear him preach. Theprocession was made up of his opponents; the congregation, of hisfriends. At last, Captain John Putnam proposed that each party shouldchoose an equal number from themselves to decide the controversy; andthat Major Bartholomew Gedney, from the town, should be invited to actas moderator of the joint meeting. Both sides agreed, and appointedtheir representatives. Major Gedney consented to preside. But thismovement came to nothing, probably owing to the refractoriness of Mr. Parris; for, from that moment, he had no supporters. The church ceasedto act: its members were merged in the meeting of the inhabitants. There was no longer any division among them. The party that had actedas friends of Mr. Parris united thenceforward with his opponents todefend the parish in the suit he had brought against it in the courts. The controversy was quite protracted. The Court was determined touphold him, and expressed its prejudice against the parish, sometimeswith considerable severity of manner and action. [A]

[Footnote A: The following passage is from the parish records:--

"On the 3d of February, 1693, a warrant was issued for a meeting ofthe inhabitants of the village, signed by Thomas Preston, Joseph Pope, Joseph Houlton, and John Tarbell, of the standing annual committee, tobe held Feb. 14, 'to consider and agree and determine who are capableof voting in our public transactions, by the power given us by theGeneral-court order at our first settlement; and to consider of andmake void a vote in our book of records, on the 18th of June, 1689, where there is a salary of sixty-six pounds stated to Mr. Parris, henot complying with it; also to consider of and make void several votesin the book of records on the 10th of October, 1692, where ourministry house and barn and two acres of land seem to be conveyed fromus after a fraudulent manner. '"

At this meeting, it was voted, that "all men that are ratable, orhereafter shall be living within that tract of land mentioned in ourGeneral-court order, shall have liberty in nominating and appointing acommittee, and voting in any of our public concerns. "

By referring to the account, in the First Part, of the controversybetween the inhabitants of the village and Mr. Bayley, "the power"above alluded to, "given us by the General Court, " will be seen fullydescribed. In its earnestness to fasten Mr. Bayley upon "theinhabitants, " the Court elaborately ordained the system by which theyshould be constrained to provide for him, and compelled to raise themeans of paying his salary. As no church had then been organized, theGeneral Court fastened the duty upon "householders. " The fact had notbeen forgotten, and the above vote showed that the parish intended tohold on to the power then given them. This highly incensed the Courtof Sessions. It ordered the parish book of records to be producedbefore it, and caused a condemnation of such a claim of right to bewritten out, in open Court, on the face of the record, where it is nowto be seen. It is as follows:--

"At the General Sessions of the Peace holden at Ipswich, March the28th, 1693. This Court having viewed and considered the aboveagreement or vote contained in the last five lines, finding the sameto be repugnant to the laws of this province, do declare the same tobe null and void, and that this order be recorded with the records ofthis Court. 

"Attest, STEPHEN SEWALL, _Clerk_. "]

The parish heeded not the frowns of the Court, but persistedinexorably in its purpose to get rid of Mr. Parris. After an obstinatecontest, it prevailed. In the last stage of the controversy, itappointed four men, as its agents or attorneys, whose names indicatethe spirit in which it acted, --John Tarbell, Samuel Nurse, DanielAndrew, and Joseph Putnam. His dauntless son did not follow the wolfthrough the deep and dark recesses of his den with a more determinedresolution than that with which Joseph Putnam pursued Samuel Parristhrough the windings of the law, until he ferreted him out, and ridthe village of him for ever. 

Finally, the inferior court of Common Pleas, before which Mr. Parrishad carried the case, ordered that the matters in controversy betweenhim and the inhabitants of Salem Village should be referred toarbitrators for decision. The following statement was laid before themby the persons representing the inhabitants:--

 _"To the Honorable Wait Winthrop, Elisha Cook, and Samuel Sewall, Esquires, Arbitrators, indifferently chosen, between Mr. Samuel Parris and the Inhabitants of Salem Village. _

 _"The Remonstrances of several Aggrieved Persons in the said Village, with further Reasons why they conceive they ought not to hear Mr. Parris, nor to own him as a Minister of the Gospel, nor to contribute any Support to him as such for several years past, humbly offered as fit for consideration. _

 "We humbly conceive that, having, in April, 1693, given our reasons why we could not join with Mr. Parris in prayer, preaching, or sacrament, if these reasons are found sufficient for our withdrawing (and we cannot yet find but they are), then we conceive ourselves virtually discharged, not only in conscience, but also in law, which requires maintenance to be given to such as are orthodox and blameless; the said Mr. Parris having been teaching such dangerous errors, and preached such scandalous immoralities, as ought to discharge any (though ever so gifted otherways) from the work of the ministry, particularly in his oath against the lives of several, wherein he swears that the prisoners with their looks knock down those pretended sufferers. We humbly conceive that he that swears to more than he is certain of, is equally guilty of perjury with him that swears to what is false. And though they did fall at such a time, yet it could not be known that they did it, much less could they be certain of it; yet did swear positively against the lives of such as he could not have any knowledge but they might be innocent. 

 "His believing the Devil's accusations, and readily departing from all charity to persons, though of blameless and godly lives, upon such suggestions; his promoting such accusations; as also his partiality therein in stifling the accusations of some, and, at the same time, vigilantly promoting others, --as we conceive, are just causes for our refusal, &c. 

 "That Mr. Parris's going to Mary Walcot or Abigail Williams, and directing others to them, to know who afflicted the people in their illnesses, --we understand this to be a dealing with them that have a familiar spirit, and an implicit denying the providence of God, who alone, as we believe, can send afflictions, or cause devils to afflict any: this we also conceive sufficient to justify such refusal. 

 "That Mr. Parris, by these practices and principles, has been the beginner and procurer of the sorest afflictions, not to this village only, but to this whole country, that did ever befall them. 

 "We, the subscribers, in behalf of ourselves, and of several others of the same mind with us (touching these things), having some of us had our relations by these practices taken off by an untimely death; others have been imprisoned and suffered in our persons, reputations, and estates, --submit the whole to your honors' decision, to determine whether we are or ought to be any ways obliged to honor, respect, and support such an instrument of our miseries; praying God to guide your honors to act herein as may be for his glory, and the future settlement of our village in amity and unity. 

 "JOHN TARBELL, SAMUEL NURSE, JOSEPH PUTNAM, DANIEL ANDREW, _Attorneys for the people of the Village_. 

 Boston, July 21, 1697. "

The arbitrators decided that the inhabitants should pay to Mr. Parrisa certain amount for arrearages, and also the sum of £79. 9_s. _ 6_d. _for all his right and interest in the ministry house and land, andthat he be forthwith dismissed; and his ministerial relation to thechurch and society in Salem Village dissolved. The parish raised themoney with great alacrity. Nathaniel Ingersoll, who had, as has beenstated, made him a present at his settlement of a valuable piece ofland adjoining the parsonage grounds, bought it back, paying him aliberal price for it, fully equal to its value; and he left the place, so far as appears, for ever. 

On the 14th of July, 1696, in the midst of his controversy with hispeople, his wife died. She was an excellent woman; and was respectedand lamented by all. He caused a stone slab to be placed at the headof her grave, with a suitable inscription, still plainly legible, concluding with four lines, to which his initials are appended, composed by him, of which this is one: "Farewell, best wife, choicemother, neighbor, friend. " Her ashes rest in what is called theWadsworth burial ground. 

Mr. Parris removed to Newton, then to Concord; and in November, 1697, began to preach at Stow, on a salary of forty pounds, half in moneyand half in provisions, &c. A grant from the general court was reliedupon from year to year to help to make up the twenty pounds to be paidin money. Afterwards he preached at Dunstable, partly supported by agrant from the general court, and finally in Sudbury, where he died, Feb. 27, 1720. His daughter Elizabeth, who belonged, it will beremembered, to the circle of "afflicted children" in 1692, then nineyears of age, in 1710 married Benjamin Barnes of Concord. Two otherdaughters married in Sudbury. His son Noyes, who graduated at HarvardCollege in 1721, became deranged, and was supported by the town. Hisother son Samuel was long deacon of the church at Sudbury, and diedNov. 22, 1792, aged ninety-one years. 

In the "Boston News Letter, " No. 1433, July 15, 1731, is a notice, asfollows:--

 "Any person or persons who knew Mr. Samuel Parris, formerly of Barbadoes, afterwards of Boston in New England, merchant, and after that minister of Salem Village, &c. , deceased to be a son of Thomas Parris of the island aforesaid, Esq. Who deceased 1673, or sole heir by will to all his estate in said island, are desired to give or send notice thereof to the printer of this paper; and it shall be for their advantage. "

Whether the identity of Mr. Parris, of Salem Village, with the son ofThomas Parris, of Barbadoes, was established, we have no information. If it was, some relief may have come to his descendants. There isevery reason to believe, that, after leaving the village, he and hisfamily suffered from extremely limited means, if not from absolutepoverty. The general ill-repute brought upon him by his conduct in thewitchcraft prosecutions followed him to the last. He had forfeited thesympathy of his clerical brethren by his obstinate refusal to taketheir advice. They earnestly, over and over again, expostulatedagainst his prolonging the controversy with the people of SalemVillage, besought him to relinquish it, and promised him, if he would, to provide an eligible settlement elsewhere. They actually did provideone. But he rejected their counsels and persuasions, in expressions ofill-concealed bitterness. So that, when he was finally driven away, they felt under no obligations to befriend him; and with his eminentabilities he eked out a precarious and inadequate maintenance forhimself and family, in feeble settlements in outskirt towns, duringthe rest of his days. 

It is difficult to describe the character of this unfortunate man. Just as is the condemnation which facts compel history to pronounce, Ihave a feeling of relief in the thought, that, before the tribunal towhich he so long ago passed, the mercy we all shall need, whichcomprehends all motives and allows for all infirmities, has beenextended to him, in its infinite wisdom and benignity. 

He was a man of uncommon abilities, of extraordinary vivacity andactivity of intellect. He does not appear to have been wilfullymalevolent; although somewhat reckless in a contest, he was notdeliberately untruthful; on the contrary, there is in his statements asingular ingenuousness and fairness, seldom to be found in a partisan, much more seldom in a principal. Although we get almost all we know ofthe examinations of accused parties in the witchcraft proceedings, andof his long contentions with his parish, from him, there is hardly anyground to regret that the parties on the other side had no friends totell their story. A transparency of character, a sort of instinctiveincontinency of mind, which made him let out every thing, or a sort ofblindness which prevented his seeing the bearings of what was said anddone, make his reports the vehicles of the materials for the defenceof the very persons he was prosecuting. I know of no instance like it. His style is lucid, graphic, lively, natural to the highest degree;and whatever he describes, we see the whole, and, as it were, from allpoints of view. Language flowed from his pen with a facility, simplicity, expressiveness, and accuracy, not surpassed or oftenequalled. He wrote as men talk, using colloquial expressions withoutreserve, but always to the point. When we read, we hear him;abbreviating names, and clipping words, as in the most familiar andunguarded conversation. He was not hampered by fear of offending therules which some think necessary to dignify composition. In hisoff-hand, free and easy, gossiping entries in the church-book, or inhis carefully prepared productions, like the "Meditations for Peace, "read before his church and the dissatisfied brethren, we havespecimens of plain good English, in its most translucent and effectiveforms. Considering that his academic education was early broken off, and many intermediate years were spent in commercial pursuits, hislearning and attainments are quite remarkable. The various troublesand tragic mischiefs of his life, the terrible wrongs he inflicted onothers, and the retributions he brought upon himself, are traceable totwo or three peculiarities in his mental and moral organization. 

He had a passion for a scene, a ceremony, an excitement. He delightedin the exercise of power, and rejoiced in conflicts or commotions, from the exhilaration they occasioned, and the opportunity they gavefor the gratification of the activity of his nature. He pursued theobject of getting possession of the ministry house and land with suchdesperate pertinacity, not, I think, from avaricious motives, but forthe sake of the power it would give him as a considerable landholder. His love of form and public excitement led him to operate as he didwith his church. He kept it in continual action during the few yearsof his ministry. He had at least seventy-five special meetings of thatbody, without counting those which probably occurred without number, but of which there is no record, during the six months of thewitchcraft period. Twice, the brethren gave out, wholly exhausted; andthe powers of the church were, by vote, transferred to a specialcommittee, to act in its behalf, composed of persons who had time andstrength to spare. But Mr. Parris, never weary of excitement, wouldhave been delighted to preside over church-meetings, and to be aparticipator in vehement proceedings, every day of his life. The morenoisy and heated the contention, the more he enjoyed it. During allthe transactions connected with the witchcraft prosecutions, he waseverywhere present, always wide awake, full of animation, if notcheerfulness, and ready to take any part to carry them on. Thesepropensities and dispositions were fraught with danger, and prolificof evil in his case, in consequence of what looks very much like atotal want in himself of many of the natural human sensibilities, andan inability to apprehend them in others. Through all the horrors ofthe witchcraft prosecutions, he never evinced the slightestsensibility, and never seemed to be aware that anybody else had any. It was not absolute cruelty, but the absence of what may be regardedas a natural sense. It was not a positive wickedness, but a negativedefect. He seemed to be surprised that other people had sentiments, and could not understand why Tarbell and Nurse felt so badly about theexecution of their mother. He told them to their faces, withoutdreaming of giving them offence, that, while they thought she wasinnocent, and he thought she was guilty and had been justly put todeath, it was a mere difference of opinion, as about an indifferentmatter. In his "Meditations for Peace, " presented to thesedissatisfied brethren, for the purpose and with an earnest desire ofappeasing them, he tells them that the indulgence of such feelings atall is a yielding to "temptation, " being under "the clouds of humanweakness, " and "a bewraying of remaining corruption. " Indeed, thetheology of that day, it must be allowed, bore very hard upon even thebest and most sacred affections of our nature. The council, in theirResult, allude to the feelings of those whose parents, and other mostloved and honored relatives and connections, had been so cruelly tornfrom them and put to death, as "infirmities discovered by them in suchan heart-breaking day, " and bespeak for their grief and lamentations acharitable construction. They ask the church, whose hands were redwith the blood of their innocent and dearest friends, not to pursuethem with "more critical and vigorous proceedings" in consequence oftheir exhibiting these natural sensibilities on the occasion, but "totreat them with bowels of much compassion. " These views had taken fulleffect upon Mr. Parris, and obliterated from his breast all such"infirmities. " This is the only explanation or apology that can bemade for him. 

Of the history of Cotton Mather, subsequently to the witchcraftprosecutions, and more or less in consequence of his agency in them, it may be said that the residue of his life was doomed todisappointment, and imbittered by reproach and defeat. The storm offanatical delusion, which he doubted not would carry him to theheights of clerical and spiritual power, in America and everywhere, had left him a wreck. His political aspirations, always one of hisstrongest passions, were wholly blasted; and the great aim and crownof his ambition, the Presidency of Harvard College, once and again andfor ever had eluded his grasp. I leave him to tell his story, andreveal the state of his mind and heart in his own most free and fullexpressions from his private diary for the year 1724. 

 "1. What has a gracious Lord helped me to do for the _seafaring tribe_, in prayers for them, in sermons to them, in books bestowed upon them, and in various projections and endeavors to render the sailors a happy generation? And yet there is not a man in the world so reviled, so slandered, so cursed among sailors. 

 "2. What has a gracious Lord helped me to do for the instruction and salvation and comfort of the poor negroes? And yet some, on purpose to affront me, call their negroes by the name of COTTON MATHER, that so they may, with some shadow of truth, assert crimes as committed by one of that name, which the hearers take to be _Me_. 

 "3. What has a gracious Lord given me to do for the profit and honor of the female sex, especially in publishing the virtuous and laudable characters of holy women? And yet where is the man whom the female sex have spit more of their venom at? I have cause to question whether there are twice ten in the town but what have, at some time or other, spoken _basely_ of me. 

 "4. What has a gracious Lord given me to do, that I may be a blessing to my relatives? I keep a catalogue of them, and not a week passes me without some good devised for some or other of them, till I have taken all of them under my cognizance. And yet where is the man who has been so tormented with such _monstrous_ relatives? Job said, '_I am a brother to dragons. _'

 "5. What has a gracious Lord given me to do for the vindication and reputation of the Scottish nation? And yet no Englishman has been so vilified by the tongues and pens of Scots as I have been. 

 "6. What has a gracious Lord given me to do for the good of the country, in applications without number for it in all its interests, besides publications of things useful to it and for it? And yet there is no man whom the country so loads with disrespect and calumnies and manifold expressions of aversion. 

 "7. What has a gracious Lord given me to do for the upholding of the government, and the strengthening of it, and the bespeaking of regards unto it? And yet the discountenance I have almost perpetually received from the government! Yea, the indecencies and indignities which it has multiplied upon me are such as no other man has been treated with. 

 "8. What has a gracious Lord given me to do, that the COLLEGE may be owned for the bringing forth such as are somewhat known in the world, and have read and wrote as much as many have done in other places? And yet the College for ever puts all possible marks of disesteem upon me. If I were the greatest blockhead that ever came from it, or the greatest blemish that ever came to it, they could not easily show me more contempt than they do. 

 "9. What has a gracious Lord given me to do for the study of _a profitable conversation_? For nearly fifty years together, I have hardly ever gone into any company, or had any coming to me, without some explicit contrivance to speak something or other that they might be the wiser or the better for. And yet my company is as little sought for, and there is as little resort unto it, as any minister that I am acquainted with. 

 "10. What has a gracious Lord given me to do in _good offices_, wherever I could find opportunities for the doing of them? I for ever entertain them with alacrity. I have offered pecuniary recompenses to such as would advise me of them. And yet I see no man for whom all are so loth to do good offices. Indeed I find some cordial friends, _but how few_! Often have I said, What would I give if there were any one man in the world to do for me what I am willing to do for every man in the world!

 "11. What has a gracious Lord given me to do in the writing of many books for the advancing of piety and the promoting of his kingdom? There are, I suppose, more than three hundred of them. And yet I have had more books written against me, more pamphlets to traduce and reproach me and belie me, than any man I know in the world. 

 "12. What has a gracious Lord given me to do in a variety of _services_? For many lustres of years, not a day has passed me, without some devices, even written devices, to be serviceable. And yet my sufferings! They seem to be (as in reason they should be) more than my services. Everybody points at me, and speaks of me as by far the most afflicted minister in all New England. And many look on me as the greatest sinner, because the greatest sufferer; and are pretty arbitrary in their conjectures upon my punished miscarriages. "

 "_Diary, May 7, 1724. _--The sudden death of the unhappy man who sustained the place of President in our College will open a door for my doing singular services in the best of interests. I do not know that the care of the College will now be cast upon me, though I am told that it is what is most generally wished for. If it should be, I shall be in abundance of distress about it; but, if it should not, yet I may do many things for the good of the College more quietly and more hopefully than formerly. 

 "_June 5. _--The College is in great hazard of dissipation and grievous destruction and confusion. My advice to some that have some influence on the public may be seasonable. 

 "_July 1, 1724. _--This day being our _insipid, ill-contrived anniversary_, which we call the _Commencement_, I chose to spend it at home in supplications, partly on the behalf of the College that it may not be foolishly thrown away, but that God may bestow such a President upon it as may prove a rich blessing unto it and unto all our churches. "

On the 18th of November, 1724, the corporation of Harvard Collegeelected the Rev. Benjamin Colman, pastor of the Brattle-street Churchin Boston, to the vacant presidential chair. He declined theappointment. The question hung in suspense another six months. InJune, 1725, the Rev. Benjamin Wadsworth, pastor of the First Church inBoston, was elected, accepted the office, and held it to his death, onthe 16th of March, 1737. It may easily be imagined how keenly theserepeated slights were felt by Cotton Mather. He died on the 13th ofFebruary, 1728. 

From the early part of the spring of 1695, when the abortive attemptto settle the difficulty between Mr. Parris and the people of thevillage, by the umpirage of Major Gedney, was made, it evidentlybecame the settled purpose of the leading men, on both sides, torestore harmony to the place. On all committees, persons who had beenprominent in opposition to each other were joined together, that, thusco-operating, they might become reconciled. This is strikinglyillustrated in the "seating of the meeting-house, " as it was called. In 1699, in a seat accommodating three persons, John Putnam the son ofNathaniel, and John Tarbell, were two of the three. Another seat forthree was occupied by James and John Putnam, sons of John, and byThomas Wilkins. Thomas Putnam and Samuel Nurse were placed in the sameseat; and so were the wives of Thomas Putnam and Samuel Nurse, and thewidow Sarah Houlton. The widow Preston, daughter of Rebecca Nurse, wasseated with the widow Walcot, mother of Mary, one of the accusinggirls. 

We see in this the effect of the wise and decisive course adopted byMr. Parris's successor, the Rev. Joseph Green. Immediately upon hisordination, Nov. 10, 1698, he addressed himself in earnest to the workof reconciliation in that distracted parish. From the date of itsexistence, nearly thirty years before, it had been torn by constantstrife. It had just passed through scenes which had brought all heartsinto the most terrible alienation. A man of less faith would not havebelieved it possible, that the horrors and outrages of those scenescould ever be forgotten, forgiven, or atoned for, by those who hadsuffered or committed the wrongs. But he knew the infinite power ofthe divine love, which, as a minister of Christ, it was his office toinspire and diffuse. He knew that, with the blessing of God, thatpeople, who had from the first been devouring each other, and uponwhose garments the stain of the blood of brethren and sisters wasfresh, might be made "kind one to another, tender-hearted, forgivingone another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven" them. Inthis heroic and Christ-like faith, he entered upon and steadfastlyadhered to his divine work. He pursued it with patience, wisdom, andcourageous energy. No ministry in the whole history of the New-Englandchurches has had a more difficult task put upon it, and none has moreperfectly succeeded in its labors. I shall describe the administrationof this good man, as a minister of reconciliation, in his own words, transcribed from his church records:--

 "Nov. 25, 1698, being spent in holy exercises (in order to our preparation for the sacrament of the Lord's Supper), at John Putnam, Jr. 's, after the exercise, I desired the church to manifest, by the usual sign, that they were so cordially satisfied with their brethren, Thomas Wilkins, John Tarbell, and Samuel Nurse, that they were heartily desirous that they would join with us in all ordinances, that so we might all live lovingly together. This they consented unto, and none made any objection, but voted it by lifting up their hands. And further, that whatever articles they had drawn up against these brethren formerly, they now looked upon them as nothing, but let them fall to the ground, being willing that they should be buried for ever. 

 "Feb. 5, 1699. --This day, also our brother John Tarbell, and his wife, and Thomas Wilkins and his wife, and Samuel Nurse's wife, joined with us in the Lord's Supper; which is a matter of thankfulness, seeing they have for a long time been so offended as that they could not comfortably join with us. 

 "1702. --In December, the pastor spake to the church, on the sabbath, as followeth: 'Brethren, I find in your church-book a record of Martha Corey's being excommunicated for witchcraft; and, the generality of the land being sensible of the errors that prevailed in that day, some of her friends have moved me several times to propose to the church whether it be not our duty to recall that sentence, that so it may not stand against her to all generations; and I myself being a stranger to her, and being ignorant of what was alleged against her, I shall now only leave it to your consideration, and shall determine the matter by a vote the next convenient opportunity. '

 "Feb. 14, 1702/3. --The major part of the brethren consented to the following: 'Whereas this church passed a vote, Sept. 11, 1692, for the excommunication of Martha Corey, and that sentence was pronounced against her Sept. 14, by Mr. Samuel Parris, formerly the pastor of this church; she being, before her excommunication, condemned, and afterwards executed, for supposed witchcraft; and there being a record of this in our church-book, page 12, we being moved hereunto, do freely consent and heartily desire that the same sentence may be revoked, and that it may stand no longer against her; for we are, through God's mercy to us, convinced that we were at that dark day under the power of those errors which then prevailed in the land; and we are sensible that we had not sufficient grounds to think her guilty of that crime for which she was condemned and executed; and that her excommunication was not according to the mind of God, and therefore we desire that this may be entered in our church-book, to take off that odium that is cast on her name, and that so God may forgive our sin, and may be atoned for the land; and we humbly pray that God will not leave us any more to such errors and sins, but will teach and enable us always to do that which is right in his sight. '

 "There was a major part voted, and six or seven dissented. 

 "J. GR. , _Pr. _"

The First Church in Salem rescinded its votes of excommunication ofRebecca Nurse and Giles Corey, in March, 1712. The church at thevillage was nearly ten years before it, in this act of justice toitself and to the memory of the injured dead. Mr. Green did not waituntil the public sentiment drove him to it. He regarded it as his dutyto lead, and keep in front of that sentiment, in the right direction. He did not wait until everybody demanded it to be done, but instantlybegan to prepare his people for it. At the proper time, he gave noticethat he was about to bring the question before them; and heaccordingly did so. He had no idea of allowing a few narrow-minded, obstinate individuals to keep the blot any longer upon the records ofhis church. His conduct is honorable to his name, and to the name ofthe village. By wise, prudent, but persistent efforts, he graduallyrepaired every breach, brought his parish out from under reproach, andset them right with each other, with the obligations of justice, andwith the spirit of Christianity. It is affecting to read hisejaculations of praise and gratitude to God for every symptom of theprevalence of harmony and love among the people of his charge. 

The man who extinguished the fires of passion in a community that hadever before been consumed by them deserves to be held in lastinghonor. The history of the witchcraft delusion in Salem Village would, indeed, be imperfectly written, if it failed to present the characterof him who healed its wounds, obliterated the traces of its maligninfluence on the hearts and lives of those who acted, and repaired thewrongs done to the memory of those who suffered, in it. Joseph Greenhad a manly and amiable nature. He was a studious scholar and an ablepreacher. He was devoted to his ministry and faithful to itsobligations. He was a leader of his people, and shared in theiroccupations and experiences. He was active in the ordinary employmentsof life and daily concerns of society. Possessed of independentproperty, he was frugal and simple in his habits, and liberal in theuse of his means. The parsonage, while he lived in it, was the abodeof hospitality, and frequented by the best society in theneighborhood. By mingled firmness and kindliness, he met and removeddifficulties. He had a cheerful temperament, was not irritated by thecourse of events, even when of an unpleasant character. While Mr. Noyes was disturbed, even to resentment, by encroachments upon hisparish, in the formation of new societies in the middle precinct ofSalem, now South Danvers, and in the second precinct of Beverly, nowUpper Beverly, Mr. Green, although they drew away from him as many asfrom Mr. Noyes, went to participate in the raising of theirmeeting-houses. Of a genial disposition, he countenanced innocentamusements. He was fond of the sports of the field. The catamount wasamong the trophies of his sure aim, and he came home with hishuntsman's bag filled with wild pigeons. He would take his little sonsbefore and behind him on his horse, and spend a day with them fishingand fowling on Wilkins's Pond; and, when Indians threatened thesettlements, he would shoulder his musket, join the brave young men ofhis parish, and be the first in the encounter, and the last torelinquish the pursuit of the savage foe. 

He was always, everywhere, a peacemaker; by his genial manner, and hisgenuine dignity and decision of character, he removed dissensions fromhis church and neighborhood, and secured the respect while he won thelove of all. That such a person was raised up and placed where he wasat that time, was truly a providence of God. 

The part performed in the witchcraft tragedy by the extraordinarychild of twelve years of age, Ann Putnam, has been fully set forth. Ashas been stated, both her parents (and no one can measure their shareof responsibility, nor that of others behind them, for her conduct)died within a fortnight of each other, in 1699. She was then nineteenyears of age; a large family of children, all younger than herself, was left with her in the most melancholy orphanage. How many therewere, we do not exactly know: eight survived her. Although theiruncles, Edward and Joseph, were near, and kind, and able to care forthem, the burden thrown upon her must have been great. With theterrible remembrance of the scenes of 1692, it was greater than shecould bear. Her health began to decline, and she was long an invalid. Under the tender and faithful guidance of Mr. Green, she did all thatshe could to seek the forgiveness of God and man. After consultationswith him, in visits to his study, a confession was drawn up, which shedesired publicly to make. Upon conferring with Samuel Nurse, it wasfound to be satisfactory to him, as the representative of those whohad suffered from her testimony. It was her desire to offer thisconfession and a profession of religion at the same time. The day wasfixed, and made known to the public. On the 25th of August, 1706, agreat concourse assembled in the meeting-house. Large numbers camefrom other places, particularly from the town of Salem. The followingdocument, having been judged sufficient and suitable, was written outin the church-book the evening before, and signed by her. It was readby the pastor before the congregation, who were seated; she standingin her place while it was read, and owning it as hers by a declarationto that effect at its close, and also acknowledging the signature. 

 _"The Confession of Anne Putnam, when she was received to Communion, 1706. _

 "I desire to be humbled before God for that sad and humbling providence that befell my father's family in the year about '92; that I, then being in my childhood, should, by such a providence of God, be made an instrument for the accusing of several persons of a grievous crime, whereby their lives were taken away from them, whom now I have just grounds and good reason to believe they were innocent persons; and that it was a great delusion of Satan that deceived me in that sad time, whereby I justly fear I have been instrumental, with others, though ignorantly and unwittingly, to bring upon myself and this land the guilt of innocent blood; though what was said or done by me against any person I can truly and uprightly say, before God and man, I did it not out of any anger, malice, or ill-will to any person, for I had no such thing against one of them; but what I did was ignorantly, being deluded by Satan. And particularly, as I was a chief instrument of accusing of Goodwife Nurse and her two sisters, I desire to lie in the dust, and to be humbled for it, in that I was a cause, with others, of so sad a calamity to them and their families; for which cause I desire to lie in the dust, and earnestly beg forgiveness of God, and from all those unto whom I have given just cause of sorrow and offence, whose relations were taken away or accused. 

 [Signed] [Illustration: [signature]]

 "This confession was read before the congregation, together with her relation, Aug. 25, 1706; and she acknowledged it. 

 "J. GREEN, _Pastor_. 

This paper shows the baleful influence of the doctrine of Satan thenreceived. It afforded a refuge and escape from the compunctions ofconscience. The load of sin was easily thrown upon the back of Satan. This young woman was undoubtedly sincere in her penitence, and wasforgiven, we trust and believe; but she failed to see the depth of heriniquity, and of those who instigated and aided her, in her falseaccusations. The blame, and the deed, were wholly hers and theirs. Satan had no share in it. Human responsibility cannot thus be avoided. 

While, in a certain sense, she imputes the blame to Satan, thisdeclaration of Ann Putnam is conclusive evidence that she and herconfederate accusers did not believe in any communications having beenmade to them by invisible spirits of any kind. Those persons, in ourday, who imagine that they hold intercourse, by rapping or otherwise, with spiritual beings, have sometimes found arguments in favor oftheir belief in the phenomena of the witchcraft trials. But AnnPutnam's confession is decisive against this. If she had reallyreceived from invisible beings, subordinate spirits, or the spirits ofdeceased persons, the matters to which she testified, or ever believedthat she had, she would have said so. On the contrary, she declaresthat she had no foundation whatever, from any source, for what shesaid, but was under the subtle and mysterious influence of the Devilhimself. 

She died at about the age of thirty-six years. Her will is dated May20, 1715, and was presented in probate June 29, 1716. Its preamble isas follows:--

 "In the name of God, amen. I, Anne Putnam, of the town of Salem, single woman, being oftentimes sick and weak in body, but of a disposing mind and memory, blessed be God! and calling to mind the mortality of my body, and that it is appointed for all men once to die, do make this my last will and testament. First of all, I recommend my spirit into the hands of God, through Jesus Christ my Redeemer, with whom I hope to live for ever; and, as for my body, I commit it to the earth, to be buried in a Christian and decent manner, at the discretion of my executor, hereafter named, nothing doubting but, by the mighty power of God, to receive the same again at the resurrection. "

She divided her land to her four brothers, and her personal estate toher four sisters. 

It seems that she was frequently the subject of sickness, and herbodily powers much weakened. The probability is, that thelong-continued strain kept upon her muscular and nervous organization, during the witchcraft scenes, had destroyed her constitution. Suchuninterrupted and vehement exercise, to their utmost tension, of theimaginative, intellectual, and physical powers, in crowded and heatedrooms, before the public gaze, and under the feverish and consuminginfluence of bewildering and all but delirious excitement, couldhardly fail to sap the foundations of health in so young a child. Thetradition is, that she had a slow and fluctuating decline. Thelanguage of her will intimates, that, at intervals, there wereapparent checks to her disease, and rallies of strength, --"oftentimessick and weak in body. " She inherited from her mother a sensitive andfragile constitution; but her father, although brought to the grave, probably by the terrible responsibilities and trials in which he hadbeen involved, at a comparatively early age, belonged to a long-livedrace and neighborhood. The opposite elements of her compositionstruggled in a protracted contest, --on the one side, a nature morbidlysubject to nervous excitability sinking under the exhaustion of anoverworked, overburdened, and shattered system; on the other, tenacityof life. The conflict continued with alternating success for years;but the latter gave way at last. Her story, in all its aspects, isworthy of the study of the psychologist. Her confession, profession, and death point the moral. 

The Rev. Joseph Green died Nov. 26, 1715. The following tribute to hismemory is inscribed on the records of the church. It is in thehandwriting, and style of thought and language, of Deacon EdwardPutnam. 

 "Then was the choicest flower and greenest olive-tree in the garden of our God here cut down in its prime and flourishing estate at the age of forty years and two days, who had been a faithful ambassador from God to us eighteen years. Then did that bright star set, and never more to appear here among us; then did our sun go down; and now what darkness is come upon us! Put away and pardon our iniquities, O Lord! which have been the cause of thy sore displeasure, and return to us again in mercy, and provide yet again for this thy flock a pastor after thy own heart, as thou hath promised to thy people in thy word; on which promise we have hope, for we are called by thy name; and, oh, leave us not!"

The Rev. Peter Clark was ordained June 5, 1717. The termination of theconnection between the Salem Village church and the witchcraftdelusion, and all similar kinds of absurdity and wickedness, is markedby the following record, which fully and for ever redeems itscharacter. If Samuel Parris had been as wise and brave as Peter Clark, he would, in the same decisive manner, have nipped the thing in thebud. 

 _"Salem Village Church Records. _

 "Sept. 5, 1746. --At a church meeting appointed on the lecture, the day before, on the occasion of several persons in this parish being reported to have resorted to a woman of a very ill reputation, pretending to the art of divination and fortune-telling, &c. , to make inquiry into that matter, and to take such resolutions as may be thought proper on the occasion, the brethren of the church then present came into the following votes; viz. , That for Christians, especially church-members, to seek to and consult reputed witches or fortune-tellers, this church is clearly of opinion, and firmly believes on the testimony of the Word of God, is highly impious and scandalous, being a violation of the Christian covenant sealed in baptism, rendering the persons guilty of it subject to the just censure of the church. 

 "No proof appearing against any of the members of this church (some of whom had been strongly suspected of this crime), so as to convict them of their being guilty, it was further voted, That the pastor, in the name of the church, should publicly testify their disapprobation and abhorrence of this infamous and ungodly practice of consulting witches or fortune-tellers, or any that are reputed such; exhorting all under their watch, who may have been guilty of it, to an hearty repentance and returning to God, earnestly seeking forgiveness in the blood of Christ, and warning all against the like practice for the time to come. 

 "Sept. 7. --This testimony, exhortation, and warning, voted by the church, was publicly given by the pastor, before the dismission of the congregation. "

The Salem Village Parish, when its present pastor, the Rev. Charles B. Rice, was settled, Sept. 2, 1863, had been in existence a hundred andninety-one years. During its first twenty-five years, it had fourministers, whose aggregate period of service was eighteen years. During the succeeding hundred and sixty-six years, it had fourministers, whose aggregate period of service was one hundred andfifty-eight years. They had all been well educated, several were menof uncommon endowments, and without exception they possessed qualitiessuitable for success and usefulness in their calling. 

The first period was filled with an uninterrupted series of troubles, quarrels, and animosities, culminating in the most terrific andhorrible disaster that ever fell upon a people. The second period wasan uninterrupted reign of peace, harmony, and unity; no religioussociety ever enjoying more comfort in its privileges, or exhibiting abetter example of all that ought to characterize a Christiancongregation. 

The contrast between the lives of its ministers, in the two periodsrespectively, is as great as between their pastorates. The first foursuffered from inadequate means of support, and, owing to the feuds inthe congregation, rates not being collected, were hardly supplied withthe necessaries of life. There is no symptom in the records of thesecond period of there having ever been any difficulty on this score. The prompt fulfilment of their contracts by the people, and the favorof Providence, placed the ministers above the reach or approach ofinconvenience or annoyance from that quarter. 

The history of the New-England churches presents no epoch moremelancholy, distressful, and stormy than the first, and none moreunited, prosperous, or commendable than the second period in theannals of the Salem Village church. 

The contrast between the fortunes and fates of the ministers of thesetwo periods is worthy of being stated in detail. 

James Bayley began to preach at the Village at the formation of thesociety, when he was quite a young man, within three years fromreceiving his degree at Harvard College. After about seven years, during which he buried his wife and three children, and encountered abitter and turbulent opposition, --so far as we can see, most causelessand unreasonable, --he relinquished the ministry altogether, and spentthe residue of his life in another profession elsewhere. 

The ministry of George Burroughs, at the Village, lasted about twoyears. The violence of both parties to the controversy by which theparish had been rent was concentrated upon his innocent andunsheltered head. He was, at a public assembly of his people, in hisown meeting-house, arrested, and taken out in the custody of themarshal of the county, a prisoner for a debt incurred to meet theexpenses of his wife's recent funeral, of an amount less than thesalary then due him, and which, in point of fact, he had paid at thetime by an order upon the parish treasurer. From such outrageousill-treatment, he escaped by resigning his ministry. He was followedto his retreat in a remote settlement, and while engaged there, alaborious, self-sacrificing, and devoted minister, was, by themalignity of his enemies at the Village, suddenly seized, allunconscious of having wronged a human creature, snatched from thetable where he was taking his frugal meal in his humble home, tornfrom his helpless family, hurried up to the Village; overwhelmed in astorm of falsehood, rage, and folly; loaded with irons, immured in adungeon, carried to the place of execution, consigned to the death ofa felon; and his uncoffined remains thrown among the clefts of therocks of Witch Hill, and left but half buried, --for a crime of whichhe was as innocent as the unborn child. 

Deodat Lawson, a great scholar and great preacher, after a two years'trial, and having buried his wife and daughter at the Village, abandoned the attempt to quell the storm of passion there. He foundanother settlement on the other side of Massachusetts Bay, which heleft without taking leave, and was never heard of more by his people. Eight years afterwards, he re-appeared in the reprint, at London, ofhis famous Salem Village sermon, and then vanished for ever fromsight. A cloud of impenetrable darkness envelopes his name at thatpoint. Of his fate nothing is known, except that it was an "unhappy"one. 

Samuel Parris, after a ministry of seven years, crowded from the verybeginning with contention and animosity, and closed in desolation, ruin, and woes unutterable, havoc scattered among his people and thewhole country round, was driven from the parish, the blood of theinnocent charged upon his head, and, for the rest of his days, consigned to obscurity and penury. The place of his abode has upon itno habitation or structure of man; and the only vestiges left of himare his records of the long quarrel with his congregation, and hisinscription on the headstone, erected by him, as he left the Villagefor ever, over the fresh grave of his wife. 

Surely, the annals of no church present a more dismal, shocking, orshameful history than this. 

Joseph Green, on the 26th of November, 1715, terminated with his lifea ministry of eighteen years, as useful, beneficent, and honorable asit had been throughout harmonious and happy. Peter Clark died inoffice, June 10, 1768, after a service of fifty-one years. He wasrecognized throughout the country as an able minister and a learneddivine. Peace and prosperity reigned, without a moment's intermission, among the people of his charge. Benjamin Wadsworth, D. D. , also died inoffice, Jan. 18, 1826, after a service of fifty-four years. Throughlife he was universally esteemed and loved in all the churches. MiltonP. Braman, D. D. , on the 1st of April, 1861, terminated by resignationa ministry of thirty-five years. He always enjoyed universal respectand affection, and the parish under his care, uninterrupted union andprosperity. He did not leave his people, but remains among them, participating in the enjoyment of their privileges, and upholding thehands of his successor. His eminent talents are occasionally exercisedin neighboring pulpits, and in other services of public usefulness. Helives in honored retirement on land originally belonging to NathanielPutnam, distant only a few rods, a little to the north of east, fromthe spot owned and occupied by his first predecessor, James Bayley. 

It can be said with assurance, of this epoch in the history of theSalem Village church and society, that it can hardly be paralleled inall that indicates the well-being of man or the blessings of Heaven. No such contrast, as these two periods in the annals of this parishpresent, can elsewhere be found. 

Prosecutions for witchcraft continued in the older countries afterthey had been abandoned here; although it soon began to be difficult, everywhere, to procure the conviction of a person accused ofwitchcraft. In 1716, a Mrs. Hicks and her daughter, the latter agednine years, were hanged in Huntingdon, in England, for witchcraft. Inthe year 1720, an attempt, already alluded to, was made to renew theSalem excitement in Littleton, Mass. , but it failed: the people hadlearned wisdom at a price too dear to allow them so soon to forget it. In a letter to Cotton Mather, written Feb. 19, 1720, the excellent Dr. Watts, after having expressed his doubts respecting the sufficiency ofthe spectral evidence for condemnation, says, in reference to theSalem witchcraft, "I am much persuaded that there was much immediateagency of the Devil in these affairs, and perhaps there were some realwitches too. " Not far from this time, we find what was probably theopinion of the most liberal-minded and cultivated people in Englandexpressed in the following language of Addison: "To speak my thoughtsfreely, I believe, in general, that there is and has been such a thingas witchcraft, but, at the same time, can give no credit to anyparticular instance of it. "

There was an execution for witchcraft in Scotland in 1722. As late asthe middle of the last century, an annual discourse, commemorative ofexecutions that took place in Huntingdon during the reign of QueenElizabeth, continued to be delivered in that place. An act of aPresbyterian synod in Scotland, published in 1743, and reprinted atGlasgow in 1766, denounced as a national sin the repeal of the penallaws against witchcraft. 

Blackstone, the great oracle of British law, and who flourished in thelatter half of the last century, declared his belief in witchcraft inthe following strong terms: "To deny the possibility, nay, the actualexistence, of witchcraft and sorcery, is at once flatly to contradictthe revealed Word of God, in various passages both of the Old and NewTestament; and the thing itself is a truth to which every nation inthe world hath in its turn borne testimony, either by examplesseemingly well attested, or by prohibitory laws, which at leastsuppose the possibility of commerce with evil spirits. "

It is related, in White's "Natural History of Selborne, " that, in theyear 1751, the people of Tring, a market town of Hertfordshire, andscarcely more than thirty miles from London, "seized on twosuperannuated wretches, crazed with age and overwhelmed withinfirmities, on a suspicion of witchcraft. " They were carried to theedge of a horse-pond, and there subjected to the water ordeal. Thetrial resulted in the acquittal of the prisoners; but they were bothdrowned in the process. 

A systematic effort seems to have been made during the eighteenthcentury to strengthen and renew the power of superstition. Alarmed bythe progress of infidelity, many eminent and excellent men availedthemselves of the facilities which their position at the head of theprevailing literature afforded them, to push the faith of the peopleas far as possible towards the opposite extreme of credulity. It was amost unwise, and, in its effects, deplorable policy. It was a betrayalof the cause of true religion. It was an acknowledgment that it couldnot be vindicated before the tribunal of severe reason. Besides allthe misery produced by filling the imagination with unreal objects ofterror, the restoration to influence, during the last century, of thefables and delusions of an ignorant age, has done incalculable injury, by preventing the progress of Christian truth and sound philosophy;thus promoting the cause of the very infidelity it was intended tocheck. The idea of putting down one error by setting up another cannothave suggested itself to any mind that had ever been led to appreciatethe value or the force of truth. But this was the policy of Christianwriters from the time of Addison to that of Johnson. The latterexpressly confesses, that it was necessary to maintain the credit ofthe belief of the existence and agency of ghosts, and othersupernatural beings, in order to help on the argument for a futurestate as founded upon the Bible. 

Dr. Hibbert, in his excellent book on the "Philosophy of Apparitions, "illustrates some remarks similar to those just made, by the followingquotation from Mr. Wesley:--

 "It is true, that the English in general, and indeed most of the men in Europe, have given up all accounts of witches and apparitions as mere old wives' fables. I am sorry for it; and I willingly take this opportunity of entering my solemn protest against this violent compliment, which so many that believe the Bible pay to those who do not believe it. I owe them no such service. I take knowledge, these are at the bottom of the outcry which has been raised, and with such insolence spread throughout the nation, in direct opposition, not only to the Bible, but to the suffrage of the wisest and best men in all ages and nations. They well know (whether Christians know it or not), that the giving up witchcraft is, in effect, giving up the Bible. And they know, on the other hand, that, if but one account of the intercourse of men with separate spirits be admitted, their whole castle in the air (Deism, Atheism, Materialism) falls to the ground. I know no reason, therefore, why we should suffer even this weapon to be wrested out of our hands. Indeed, there are numerous arguments besides, which abundantly confute their vain imaginations. But we need not be hooted out of one: neither reason nor religion requires this. "

The belief in witchcraft continued to hold a conspicuous place amongpopular superstitions during the whole of the last century. Many nowliving can remember the time when it prevailed very generally. Eachtown or village had its peculiar traditionary tales, which weregravely related by the old, and deeply impressed upon the young. 

The legend of the "Screeching Woman" of Marblehead is worthy of beinggenerally known. The story runs thus: A piratical cruiser, havingcaptured a Spanish vessel during the seventeenth century, brought herinto Marblehead harbor, which was then the site of a few humbledwellings. The male inhabitants were all absent on their fishingvoyages. The pirates brought their prisoners ashore, carried them atthe dead of the night into a retired glen, and there murdered them. Among the captives was an English female passenger. The women whobelonged to the place heard her dying outcries, as they rose throughthe midnight air, and reverberated far and wide along the silentshores. She was heard to exclaim, "O mercy, mercy! Lord Jesus Christ, save me! Lord Jesus Christ, save me!" Her body was buried by thepirates on the spot. The same piercing voice is believed to be heardat intervals, more or less often, almost every year, in the stillnessof a calm starlight or clear moonlight night. There is something, itis said, so wild, mysterious, and evidently superhuman in the sound, as to strike a chill of dread into the hearts of all who listen to it. The writer of an article on this subject, in the "Marblehead Register"of April 3, 1830, declares, that "there are not wanting, at thepresent day, persons of unimpeachable veracity and knownrespectability, who still continue firmly to believe the tradition, and to assert that they themselves have been auditors of the soundsdescribed, which they declare were of such an unearthly nature as topreclude the idea of imposition or deception. "

When "the silver moon unclouded holds her way, " or when the stars areglistening in the clear, cold sky, and the dark forms of the mooredvessels are at rest upon the sleeping bosom of the harbor; when nonatural sound comes forth from the animate or inanimate creation butthe dull and melancholy rote of the sea along the rocky and windingcoast, --how often is the watcher startled from the reveries of anexcited imagination by the piteous, dismal, and terrific screams ofthe unlaid ghost of the murdered lady!

A negro died, fifty years ago, in that part of Danvers calledoriginally Salem Village, at a very advanced age. He was supposed tohave reached his hundredth year. He never could be prevailed upon toadmit that there was any delusion or mistake in the proceedings of1692. To him, the whole affair was easy of explanation. He believedthat the witchcraft was occasioned by the circumstance of the Devil'shaving purloined the church-book, and that it subsided so soon as thebook was recovered from his grasp. Perhaps the particular hypothesisof the venerable African was peculiar to himself; but those personsmust have a slight acquaintance with the history of opinions in thisand every other country, who are not aware that the superstition onwhich it was founded has been extensively entertained by men of everycolor, almost, if not quite, up to the present day. If the doctrinesof demonology have been completely overthrown and exterminated in ourvillages and cities, it is a very recent achievement; nay, I fear thatin many places the auspicious event remains to take place. 

In the year 1808, the inhabitants of Great Paxton, a village ofHuntingdonshire, in England, within sixty miles of London, rose in abody, attacked the house of an humble, and, so far as appears, inoffensive and estimable woman, named Ann Izard, suspected ofbewitching three young females, --Alice Brown, Fanny Amey, and MaryFox, --dragged her out of her bed into the fields, pierced her arms andbody with pins, and tore her flesh with their nails, until she wascovered with blood. They committed the same barbarous outrage upon heragain, a short time afterwards; and would have subjected her to thewater ordeal, had she not found means to fly from that part of thecountry. 

The writer of the article "Witchcraft, " in Rees's "Cyclopædia, "gravely maintains the doctrine of "ocular fascination. "

Prosecutions for witchcraft are stated to have occurred, in the firsthalf of the present century, in some of the interior districts of ourSouthern States. The civilized world is even yet full of necromancersand thaumaturgists of every kind. The science of "palmistry" is stillpractised by many a muttering vagrant; and perhaps some in thisneighborhood remember when, in the days of their youthful fancy, theyheld out their hands, that their future fortunes might be read in thelines of their palms, and their wild and giddy curiosity and anxiousaffections be gratified by information respecting wedding-day orabsent lover. 

The most celebrated fortune-teller, perhaps, that ever lived, residedin an adjoining town. The character of "Moll Pitcher" is familiarlyknown in all parts of the commercial world. She died in 1813. Herplace of abode was beneath the projecting and elevated summit of HighRock, in Lynn, and commanded a view of the wild and indented coast ofMarblehead, of the extended and resounding beaches of Lynn andChelsea, of Nahant Rocks, of the vessels and islands of Boston'sbeautiful bay, and of its remote southern shore. She derived hermysterious gifts by inheritance, her grandfather having practised thembefore in Marblehead. Sailors, merchants, and adventurers of everykind, visited her residence, and placed confidence in her predictions. People came from great distances to learn the fate of missing friends, or recover the possession of lost goods; while the young of bothsexes, impatient of the tardy pace of time, and burning with curiosityto discern the secrets of futurity, availed themselves of everyopportunity to visit her lowly dwelling, and hear from her propheticlips the revelation of the most tender incidents and important eventsof their coming lives. She read the future, and traced what to meremortal eyes were the mysteries of the present or the past, in thearrangement and aspect of the grounds or settlings of a cup of tea orcoffee. Her name has everywhere become the generic title offortune-tellers, and occupies a conspicuous place in the legends andballads of popular superstition. Her renown has gone abroad to thefarthest regions, and her memory will be perpetuated in the annals ofcredulity and imposture. An air of romance is breathed around thescenes where she practised her mystic art, the interest and charm ofwhich will increase as the lapse of time removes her history backtowards the dimness of the distant past. 

The elements of the witchcraft delusion of 1692 are slumbering stillin the bosom of society. We hear occasionally of haunted houses, casesof second-sight, and communications from the spiritual world. Italways will be so. The human mind feels instinctively its connectionwith a higher sphere. Some will ever be impatient of the restraintsof our present mode of being, and prone to break away from them; eagerto pry into the secrets of the invisible world, willing to venturebeyond the bounds of ascertainable knowledge, and, in the pursuit oftruth, to aspire where the laws of evidence cannot follow them. A loveof the marvellous is inherent to the sense of limitation while inthese terrestrial bodies; and many will always be found not content towait until this tabernacle is dissolved and we shall be clothed uponwith a body which is from Heaven. 

APPENDIX. 

 I. LAWSON'S PREFATORY ADDRESS. II. LAWSON'S BRIEF ACCOUNT. III. LETTER TO JONATHAN CORWIN. IV. EXTRACTS FROM MR. PARRIS'S CHURCH RECORDS. 

APPENDIX. 

I. 

PREFATORY ADDRESS. 

[From the edition of Deodat Lawson's Sermon printed in London, 1704. ]

_To all my Christian Friends and Acquaintance, the Inhabitants ofSalem Village. _

CHRISTIAN FRIENDS, --The sermon here presented unto you was deliveredin your audience by that unworthy instrument who did formerly spendsome years among you in the work of the ministry, though attended withmanifold sinful failings and infirmities, for which I do implore thepardoning mercy of God in Jesus Christ, and entreat from you thecovering of love. As this was prepared for that particular occasionwhen it was delivered amongst you, so the publication of it is to beparticularly recommended to your service. 

My heart's desire and continual prayer to God for you all is, that youmay be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus Christ; and, accordingly, that all means he is using with you, by mercies and afflictions, ordinances and providences, may be sanctified to the building you upin grace and holiness, and preparing you for the kingdom of glory. Weare told by the apostle (Acts xiv. 22), that through many tribulationswe must enter into the kingdom of God. Now, since (besides your sharein the common calamities, under the burden whereof this poor peopleare groaning at this time) the righteous and holy God hath beenpleased to permit a sore and grievous affliction to befall you, suchas can hardly be said to be common to men; viz. , by giving liberty toSatan to range and rage amongst you, to the torturing the bodies anddistracting the minds of some of the visible sheep and lambs of theLord Jesus Christ. And (which is yet more astonishing) he who is theaccuser of the brethren endeavors to introduce as criminal some of thevisible subjects of Christ's kingdom, by whose sober and godlyconversation in times past we could draw no other conclusions thanthat they were real members of his mystical body, representing them asthe instruments of his malice against their friends and neighbors. 

I thought meet thus to give you the best assistance I could, to helpyou out of your distresses. And since the ways of the Lord, in hispermissive as well as effective providence, are unsearchable, and hisdoings past finding out, and pious souls are at a loss what will bethe issue of these things, I therefore bow my knees unto the God andFather of our Lord Jesus Christ, that he would cause all grace toabound to you and in you, that your poor place may be delivered fromthose breaking and ruining calamities which are threatened as thepernicious consequences of Satan's malicious operations; and that youmay not be left to bite and devour one another in your sacred or civilsociety, in your relations or families, to the destroying much goodand promoting much evil among you, so as in any kind to weaken thehands or discourage the heart of your reverend and pious pastor, whosefamily also being so much under the influence of these troubles, spiritual sympathy cannot but stir you up to assist him as at alltimes, so especially at such a time as this; he, as well as hisneighbors, being under such awful circumstances. As to this discourse, my humble desire and endeavor is, that it may appear to be accordingto the form of sound words, and in expressions every way intelligibleto the meanest capacities. It pleased God, of his free grace, to giveit some acceptation with those that heard it, and some that heard ofit desired me to transcribe it, and afterwards to give way to theprinting of it. I present it therefore to your acceptance, and commendit to the divine benediction; and that it may please the Almighty Godto manifest his power in putting an end to your sorrows of thisnature, by bruising Satan under your feet shortly, causing these andall other your and our troubles to work together for our good now, andsalvation in the day of the Lord, is the unfeigned desire, and shallbe the uncessant prayer, of--

Less than the least, of all those that serve, In the Gospel of our Lord Jesus, DEODAT LAWSON. 

II. 

DEODAT LAWSON'S NARRATIVE. 

[Appended to his Sermon, London edition, 1704. ]

At the request of several worthy ministers and Christianfriends, I do here annex, by way of appendix to the preceding sermon, some brief account of those amazing things which occasioned thatdiscourse to be delivered. Let the reader please therefore to take itin the brief remarks following, and judge as God shall incline him. 

It pleased God, in the year of our Lord 1692, to visit the people at aplace called Salem Village, in New England, with a very sore andgrievous affliction, in which they had reason to believe that thesovereign and holy God was pleased to permit Satan and his instrumentsto affright and afflict those poor mortals in such an astonishing andunusual manner. 

Now, I having for some time before attended the work of the ministryin that village, the report of those great afflictions came quickly tomy notice, and the more readily because the first person afflicted wasin the minister's family who succeeded me after I was removed fromthem. In pity, therefore, to my Christian friends and formeracquaintance there, I was much concerned about them, frequentlyconsulted with them, and fervently, by divine assistance, prayed forthem; but especially my concern was augmented when it was reported, atan examination of a person suspected for witchcraft, that my wife anddaughter, who died three years before, were sent out of the worldunder the malicious operations of the infernal powers, as is morefully represented in the following remarks. I did then desire, and wasalso desired by some concerned in the Court, to be there present, thatI might hear what was alleged in that respect; observing, therefore, when I was amongst them, that the case of the afflicted was veryamazing and deplorable, and the charges brought against the accusedsuch as were ground of suspicions, yet very intricate, and difficultto draw up right conclusions about them; I thought good, for thesatisfaction of myself and such of my friends as might be curious toinquire into those mysteries of God's providence and Satan's malice, to draw up and keep by me a brief account of the most remarkablethings that came to my knowledge in those affairs, which remarks wereafterwards (at my request) revised and corrected by some who satjudges on the bench in those matters, and were now transcribed fromthe same paper on which they were then written. After this, I being bythe providence of God called over into England in the year 1696, Ithen brought that paper of remarks on the witchcraft with me; upon thesight thereof some worthy ministers and Christian friends here desiredme to reprint the sermon, and subjoin the remarks thereunto in way ofappendix; but for some particular reasons I did then decline it. Butnow, forasmuch as I myself had been an eye and ear witness of most ofthose amazing things, so far as they came within the notice of humansenses, and the requests of my friends were renewed since I came todwell in London, I have given way to the publishing of them, that Imay satisfy such as are not resolved to the contrary, that there maybe (and are) such operations of the powers of darkness on the bodiesand minds of mankind by divine permission, and that those who satjudges on those cases may, by the serious consideration of theformidable aspect and perplexed circumstances of that afflictiveprovidence, be in some measure excused, or at least be less censured, for passing sentence on several persons as being the instruments ofSatan in those diabolical operations, when they were involved in sucha dark and dismal scene of providence, in which Satan did seem to spina finer thread of spiritual wickedness than in the ordinary methods ofwitchcraft: hence the judges, desiring to bear due testimony againstsuch diabolical practices, were inclined to admit the validity of sucha sort of evidence as was not so clearly and directly demonstrable tohuman senses as in other cases is required, or else they could notdiscover the mysteries of witchcraft. I presume not to impose upon myChristian or learned reader any opinion of mine how far Satan was aninstrument in God's hand in these amazing afflictions which were onmany persons there about that time; but I am certainly convinced, thatthe great God was pleased to lengthen his chain to a very great degreefor the hurting of some and reproaching of others, as far as he waspermitted so to do. Now, that I may not grieve any whose relationswere either accused or afflicted in those times of trouble anddistress, I choose to lay down every particular at large, withoutmentioning any names or persons concerned (they being wholly unknownhere); resolving to confine myself to such a proportion of paper as isassigned to these remarks in this impression of the book, yet, that Imay be distinct, shall speak briefly to the matter under three heads;viz. :--

1. Relating to the afflicted. 2. Relating to the accused. And, 3. Relating to the confessing witches. 

To begin with the afflicted. --

1. One or two of the first that were afflicted complaining of unusualillness, their relations used physic for their cure; but it wasaltogether in vain. 

2. They were oftentimes very stupid in their fits, and could neitherhear nor understand, in the apprehension of the standers-by; so that, when prayer hath been made with some of them in such a manner as mightbe audible in a great congregation, yet, when their fit was off, theydeclared they did not hear so much as one word thereof. 

3. It was several times observed, that, when they were discoursed withabout God or Christ, or the things of salvation, they were presentlyafflicted at a dreadful rate; and hence were oftentimes outrageous, ifthey were permitted to be in the congregation in the time of thepublic worship. 

4. They sometimes told at a considerable distance, yea, several milesoff, that such and such persons were afflicted, which hath been foundto be done according to the time and manner they related it; and theysaid the spectres of the suspected persons told them of it. 

5. They affirmed that they saw the ghosts of several departed persons, who, at their appearing, did instigate them to discover such as (theysaid) were instruments to hasten their deaths, threatening sorely toafflict them if they did not make it known to the magistrates. Theydid affirm at the examination, and again at the trial of an accusedperson, that they saw the ghosts of his two wives (to whom he hadcarried very ill in their lives, as was proved by severaltestimonies), and also that they saw the ghosts of my wife anddaughter (who died above three years before); and they did affirm, that, when the very ghosts looked on the prisoner at the bar, theylooked red, as if the blood would fly out of their faces withindignation at him. The manner of it was thus: several afflicted beingbefore the prisoner at the bar, on a sudden they fixed all their eyestogether on a certain place of the floor before the prisoner, neithermoving their eyes nor bodies for some few minutes, nor answering toany question which was asked them: so soon as that trance was over, some being removed out of sight and hearing, they were all, one afteranother, asked what they saw; and they did all agree that they sawthose ghosts above mentioned. I was present, and heard and saw thewhole of what passed upon that account, during the trial of thatperson who was accused to be the instrument of Satan's malice therein. 

6. In this (worse than Gallick) persecution by the dragoons of hell, the persons afflicted were harassed at such a dreadful rate to writetheir names in a Devil-book presented by a spectre unto them: and one, in my hearing, said, "I will not, I will not write! It is none ofGod's book, it is none of God's book: it is the Devil's book, foraught I know;" and, when they steadfastly refused to sign, they weretold, if they would but touch, or take hold of, the book, it shoulddo; and, lastly, the diabolical propositions were so low and easy, that, if they would but let their clothes, or any thing about them, touch the book, they should be at ease from their torments, it beingtheir consent that is aimed at by the Devil in those representationsand operations. 

7. One who had been long afflicted at a stupendous rate by two orthree spectres, when they were (to speak after the manner of men)tired out with tormenting of her to force or fright her to sign acovenant with the Prince of Darkness, they said to her, as in adiabolical and accursed passion, "Go your ways, and the Devil go withyou; for we will be no more pestered and plagued about you. " And, everafter that, she was well, and no more afflicted, that ever I heardof. 

8. Sundry pins have been taken out of the wrists and arms of theafflicted; and one, in time of examination of a suspected person, hada pin run through both her upper and her lower lip when she was calledto speak, yet no apparent festering followed thereupon, after it wastaken out. 

9. Some of the afflicted, as they were striving in their fits in opencourt, have (by invisible means) had their wrists bound fast togetherwith a real cord, so as it could hardly be taken off without cutting. Some afflicted have been found with their arms tied, and hanged uponan hook, from whence others have been forced to take them down, thatthey might not expire in that posture. 

10. Some afflicted have been drawn under tables and beds byundiscerned force, so as they could hardly be pulled out; and one wasdrawn half-way over the side of a well, and was, with much difficulty, recovered back again. 

11. When they were most grievously afflicted, if they were brought tothe accused, and the suspected person's hand but laid upon them, theywere immediately relieved out of their tortures; but, if the accuseddid but look on them, they were instantly struck down again. Whereforethey used to cover the face of the accused, while they laid theirhands on the afflicted, and then it obtained the desired issue: for ithath been experienced (both in examinations and trials), that, so soonas the afflicted came in sight of the accused, they were immediatelycast into their fits; yea, though the accused were among the crowd ofpeople unknown to the sufferers, yet, on the first view, were theystruck down, which was observed in a child of four or five years ofage, when it was apprehended, that so many as she could look upon, either directly or by turning her head, were immediately struck intotheir fits. 

12. An iron spindle of a woollen wheel, being taken very strangely outof an house at Salem Village, was used by a spectre as an instrumentof torture to a sufferer, not being discernible to the standers-by, until it was, by the said sufferer, snatched out of the spectre'shand, and then it did immediately appear to the persons present to bereally the same iron spindle. 

13. Sometimes, in their fits, they have had their tongues drawn out oftheir mouths to a fearful length, their heads turned very much overtheir shoulders; and while they have been so strained in their fits, and had their arms and legs, &c. , wrested as if they were quitedislocated, the blood hath gushed plentifully out of their mouths fora considerable time together, which some, that they might be satisfiedthat it was real blood, took upon their finger, and rubbed on theirother hand. I saw several together thus violently strained andbleeding in their fits, to my very great astonishment that myfellow-mortals should be so grievously distressed by the invisiblepowers of darkness. For certainly all considerate persons who beheldthese things must needs be convinced, that their motions in their fitswere preternatural and involuntary, both as to the manner, which wasso strange as a well person could not (at least without great pain)screw their bodies into, and as to the violence also, they werepreternatural motions, being much beyond the ordinary force of thesame persons when they were in their right minds; so that, being suchgrievous sufferers, it would seem very hard and unjust to censure themof consenting to, or holding any voluntary converse or familiaritywith, the Devil. 

14. Their eyes were, for the most part, fast closed in theirtrance-fits, and when they were asked a question they could give noanswer; and I do verily believe, they did not hear at that time; yetdid they discourse with the spectres as with real persons, assertingthings and receiving answers affirmative or negative, as the matterwas. For instance, one, in my hearing, thus argued _with_, and railed_at_, a spectre: "Goodw---, begone, begone, begone! Are you notashamed, a woman of your profession, to afflict a poor creature so?What hurt did I ever do you in my life? You have but two years tolive, and then the Devil will torment your soul for this. Your name isblotted out of God's book, and it shall never be put into God's bookagain. Begone! For shame! Are you not afraid of what is coming uponyou? I know, I know what will make you afraid, --the wrath of an angryGod: I am sure that will make you afraid. Begone! Do not torment me. Iknow what you would have" (we judged she meant her soul): "but it isout of your reach; it is clothed with the white robes of Christ'srighteousness. " This sufferer I was well acquainted with, and knew herto be a very sober and pious woman, so far as I could judge; and itappears that she had not, in that fit, voluntary converse with theDevil, for then she might have been helped to a better guess aboutthat woman abovesaid, as to her living but two years, for she livednot many months after that time. Further, this woman, in the same fit, seemed to dispute with a spectre about a text of Scripture: theapparition seemed to deny it; she said she was sure there was such atext, and she would tell it; and then said she to the apparition, "Iam sure you will be gone, for you cannot stand before that text. " Thenwas she sorely afflicted, --her mouth drawn on one side, and her bodystrained violently for about a minute; and then said, "It is, it is, it is, " three or four times, and then was afflicted to hinder her fromtelling; at last, she broke forth, and said, "It is the third chapterof the Revelations. " I did manifest some scruple about reading it, lest Satan should draw any thereby superstitiously to improve the wordof the eternal God; yet judging I might do it once, for an experiment, I began to read; and, before I had read through the first verse, sheopened her eyes, and was well. Her husband and the spectators told meshe had often been relieved by reading texts pertinent to hercase, --as Isa. 40, 1, ch. 49, 1, ch. 50, 1, and several others. Thesethings I saw and heard from her. 

15. They were vehemently afflicted, to hinder any persons praying withthem, or holding them in any religious discourse. The woman mentionedin the former section was told by the spectre I should not go toprayer; but she said I should, and, after I had done, reasoned withthe apparition, "Did not I say he should go to prayer?" I went also tovisit a person afflicted in Boston; and, after I was gone into thehouse to which she belonged, she being abroad, and pretty well, whenshe was told I was there, she said, "I am loath to go in; for I knowhe will fall into some good discourse, and then I am sure I shall gointo a fit. " Accordingly, when she came in, I advised her to improveall the respite she had to make her peace with God, and sue out herpardon through Jesus Christ, and beg supplies of faith and every graceto deliver her from the powers of darkness; and, before I had utteredall this, she fell into a fearful fit of diabolical torture. 

16. Some of them were asked how it came to pass that they were notaffrighted when they saw the _black-man_: they said they were atfirst, but not so much afterwards. 

17. Some of them affirmed they saw the _black-man_ sit on the gallows, and that he whispered in the ears of some of the condemned personswhen they were just ready to be turned off, even while they weremaking their last speech. 

18. They declared several things to be done by witchcraft, whichhappened before some of them were born, --as strange deaths of persons, casting away of ships, &c. ; and they said the spectres told them ofit. 

19. Some of them have sundry times seen a _white-man_ appearingamongst the spectres, and, as soon as he appeared, the _black-witches_vanished: they said this white-man had often foretold them whatrespite they should have from their fits, as sometimes a day or two ormore, which fell out accordingly. One of the afflicted said she sawhim, in her fit, and was with him in a glorious place which had nocandle nor sun, yet was full of light and brightness, where there wasa multitude in white, glittering robes, and they sang the song in Rev. 5, 9; Psal. 110, 149. She was loath to leave that place, and said, "_How long shall I stay here? Let me be along with you. _" She wasgrieved she could stay no longer in that place and company. 

20. A young woman that was afflicted at a fearful rate had a spectreappeared to her with a white sheet wrapped about it, not visible tothe standers-by until this sufferer (violently striving in her fit)snatched at, took hold, and tore off a corner of that sheet. Herfather, being by her, endeavored to lay hold upon it with her, thatshe might retain what she had gotten; but, at the passing-away of thespectre, he had such a violent twitch of his hand as if it would havebeen torn off: immediately thereupon appeared in the sufferer's handthe corner of a sheet, --a real cloth, _visible_ to the spectators, which (as it is said) remains still to be seen. 

REMARKABLE THINGS RELATING TO THE ACCUSED. 

1. A woman, being brought upon public examination, desired to go toprayer. The magistrates told her they came not there to hear her pray, but to examine her in what was alleged against her relating tosuspicions of witchcraft. 

2. It was observed, both in times of examination and trial, that theaccused seemed little affected with what the sufferers underwent, orwhat was charged against them as being the instruments of Satantherein, so that the spectators were grieved at their unconcernedness. 

3. They were sometimes their _own image_, and not always practisingupon poppets made of clouts, wax, or other materials, (according tothe old methods of witchcraft); for _natural_ actions in them seemedto produce preternatural impressions on the afflicted, as biting theirlips in time of examination and trial caused the sufferers to bebitten so as they produced the marks before the magistrates andspectators: the accused pinching their hands together seemed to causethe sufferers to be _pinched_; those again _stamping_ with their feet, _these_ were tormented in their legs and feet, so as they _stampedfearfully_. After all this, if the accused did but lean against thebar at which they stood, some very sober women of the afflictedcomplained of their breasts, as if their bowels were torn out; thus, some have since confessed, they were wont to afflict such as were theobjects of their malice. 

4. Several were accused of having familiarity with the _black-man_ intime of examination and trial, and that he whispered in their ears, and therefore they could not hear the magistrates; and that one womanaccused rid (in her shape and spectre) by the place of judicature, behind the black man, in the very time when she was upon examination. 

5. When the suspected were standing at the bar, the afflicted haveaffirmed that they saw their shapes in other places suckling a yellowbird; sometimes in one place and posture, and sometimes in another. They also foretold that the spectre of the prisoner was going toafflict such or such a sufferer, which presently fell out accordingly. 

6. They were accused by the sufferers to keep days of hellish fastsand thanksgivings; and, upon one of their fast-days, they told asufferer she must not eat, it was fast-day. She said she would: theytold her they would choke her then, which, when she did eat, wasendeavored. 

7. They were also accused to hold and administer diabolicalsacraments; viz. , a mock-baptism and a Devil-supper, at which cursedimitations of the sacred institutions of our blessed Lord they usedforms of words to be trembled at in the very rehearsing: concerningbaptism I shall speak elsewhere. At their cursed supper, they weresaid to have red bread and red drink; and, when they pressed anafflicted person to eat and drink thereof, she turned away her head, and spit at it, and said, "I will not eat, I will not drink: it isblood. That is not the bread of life, that is not the water of life;and I will have none of yours. " Thus horribly doth Satan endeavor tohave his kingdom and administrations to resemble those of our LordJesus Christ. 

8. Some of the most _sober_ afflicted persons, when they were well, did affirm the spectres of such and such as they did complain of intheir fits did appear to them, and could relate what passed betwixtthem and the apparitions, after their fits were over, and give accountafter what manner they were hurt by them. 

9. Several of the accused would neither in time of examination nortrial confess any thing of what was laid to their charge: some wouldnot admit of any minister to pray with them, others refused to prayfor themselves. It was said by some of the confessing witches, thatsuch as have received the Devil-sacrament can never confess: only onewoman condemned, after the death-warrant was signed, freely confessed, which occasioned her reprieval for some time; and it was observablethis woman had one lock of hair of a very great length, viz. , fourfoot and seven inches long by measure. This lock was of a differentcolor from all the rest, which was short and gray. It grew on thehinder part of her head, and was matted together like an elf-lock. TheCourt ordered it to be cut off, to which she was very unwilling, andsaid she was told if it were cut off she should die or be sick; yetthe Court ordered it so to be. 

10. A person who had been frequently transported to and fro by thedevils for the space of near two years, was struck dumb for about ninemonths of that time; yet he, after that, had his speech restored tohim, and did depose upon oath, that, in the time while he was dumb, hewas many times bodily transported to places where the witches weregathered together, and that he there saw feasting and dancing; and, being struck on the back or shoulder, was thereby made fast to theplace, and could only see and hear at a distance. He did take his oaththat he did, with his bodily eyes, see some of the accused at thosewitch-meetings several times. I was present in court when he gave histestimony. He also proved by sundry persons, that, at those times oftransport, he was bodily absent from his abode, and could nowhere befound, but being met with by some on the road, at a distance from hishome, was suddenly conveyed away from them. 

11. The afflicted persons related that the spectres of several eminentpersons had been brought in amongst the rest; but, as the suffererssaid the Devil could not hurt them in their shapes, but two witchesseemed to take them by each hand, and lead them or force them to comein. 

12. Whiles a godly man was at prayer with a woman afflicted, thedaughter of that woman (being a sufferer in the like kind) affirmedthat she saw two of the persons accused at prayer to the Devil. 

13. It was proved by substantial evidences against one person accused, that he had such an unusual strength (though a very little man), thathe could hold out a gun with one hand behind the lock, which was nearseven foot in the barrel, being as much as a lusty man could commandwith both hands after the usual manner of shooting. It was alsoproved, that he lifted barrels of meat and barrels of molasses out ofa canoe alone, and that putting his fingers into a barrel of molasses(full within a finger's length according to custom) he carried itseveral paces; and that he put his finger into the muzzle of a gunwhich was more than five foot in the barrel, and lifted up thebutt-end thereof, lock, stock, and all, without any visible help toraise it. It was also testified, that, being abroad with his wife andhis wife's brother, he occasionally staid behind, letting his wife andher brother walk forward; but, suddenly coming up with them, he wasangry with his wife for what discourse had passed betwixt her and herbrother: they wondering how he should know it, he said, "I know yourthoughts;" at which expression, they, being amazed, asked him how hecould do that; he said, "My God, whom I serve, makes known yourthoughts to me. "

I was present when these things were testified against him, andobserved that he could not make any plea for himself (in these things)that had any weight: he had the liberty of challenging his jurorsbefore empanelling, according to the statute in that case, and usedhis liberty in challenging many; yet the jury that were sworn broughthim in guilty. 

14. The magistrates privately examined a child of four or five yearsof age, mentioned in the remarks of the afflicted, sect. 11: [p. 530]and the child told them it had a little snake which used to suck onthe lowest joint of its forefinger; and, when they (inquiring where)pointed to other places, it told them not _there_ but _here_, pointingon the lowest joint of the forefinger, where they observed a deep redspot about the bigness of a flea-bite. They asked it who gave it thatsnake, whether the black man gave it: the child said no, its mothergave it. I heard this child examined by the magistrates. 

15. It was proved by sundry testimonies against some of the accused, that, upon their malicious imprecations, wishes, or threatenings, manyobservable deaths and diseases, with many other odd inconveniences, have happened to cattle and other estate of such as were so threatenedby them, and some to the persons of men and women. 

REMARKABLE THINGS CONFESSED BY SOME SUSPECTED OF BEING GUILTY OFWITCHCRAFT. 

1. It pleased God, for the clearer discovery of those mysteries of thekingdom of darkness, so to dispose, that several persons, men, women, and children, did confess their hellish deeds, as followeth:--

2. They confessed against themselves that they were witches, told howlong they had been so, and how it came about that the Devil appearedto them; viz. , sometimes upon discontent at their mean condition inthe world, sometimes about fine clothes, sometimes for the gratifyingother carnal and sensual lusts. Satan then, upon his appearing tothem, made them fair (though false) promises, that, if they wouldyield to him, and sign his book, their desires should be answered tothe uttermost, whereupon they signed it; and thus the accursedconfederacy was confirmed betwixt them and the Prince of Darkness. 

3. Some did affirm that there were some hundreds of the society ofwitches, considerable companies of whom were affirmed to muster inarms by beat of drum. In time of examinations and trials, theydeclared that such a man was wont to call them together from allquarters to witch-meetings with the sound of a diabolical trumpet. 

4. Being brought to see the prisoners at the bar upon their trials, they did affirm in open court (I was then present), that they hadoftentimes seen them at witch-meetings, where was feasting, dancing, and jollity, as also at Devil-sacraments; and particularly that theysaw such a man ---- amongst the rest of the cursed crew, and affirmedthat he did administer the sacrament of Satan to them, encouragingthem to go on in their way, and they should certainly prevail. Theysaid also that such a woman ---- was a deacon, and served indistributing the diabolical elements: they affirmed that there weregreat numbers of the witches. 

5. They affirmed that many of those wretched souls had been baptizedat Newbury Falls, and at several other rivers and ponds; and, as tothe manner of administration, the great Officer of Hell took them upby the body, and, putting their heads into the water, said over them, "Thou art mine, I have full power over thee:" and thereupon theyengaged and covenanted to renounce God, Christ, their sacred baptism, and the whole way of Gospel salvation, and to use their utmostendeavors to oppose the kingdom of Christ, and to set up and advancethe kingdom of Satan. 

6. Some, after they had confessed, were very penitent, and did wringtheir hands, and manifest a distressing sense of what they had done, and were by the mercies of God recovered out of those snares of thekingdom of darkness. 

7. Several have confessed against their own mothers, that they wereinstruments to bring them into the Devil's covenant, to the undoing ofthem, body and soul; and some girls of eight or nine years of age diddeclare, that, after they were so betrayed by their mothers to thepower of Satan, they saw the Devil go in their own shapes to afflictothers. 

8. Some of those that confessed were immediately afflicted at adreadful rate, after the same manner with the other sufferers. 

9. Some of them confessed, that they did afflict the sufferersaccording to the time and manner they were accused thereof; and, beingasked what they did to afflict them, some said that they pricked pinsinto poppets made with rags, wax, and other materials: one thatconfessed after the signing the death-warrant said she used to afflictthem by clutching and pinching her hands together, and wishing in whatpart and after what manner she would have them afflicted, and it wasdone. 

10. They confessed the design was laid by this witchcraft to root outthe interest of Christ in New England, and that they began at theVillage in order to settling the kingdom of darkness and the powersthereof; declaring that such a man ---- was to be head conjurer, andfor his activity in that affair was to be crowned king of hell, andthat such a woman ---- was to be queen of hell. 

Thus I have given my reader a brief and true account of those fearfuland amazing operations and intrigues of the Prince of Darkness: and Imust call them so; for, let some persons be as incredulous as theyplease about the powerful and malicious influence of evil angels uponthe minds and bodies of mankind, _sure I am_ none that observed thosethings above mentioned could refer them to any other head than thesovereign permission of the holy God, and the malicious operations ofhis and our implacable enemy. I have here related nothing more thanwhat was acknowledged to be true by the judges that sat on the bench, and other credible persons there, which I have without prejudice orpartiality represented. 

I therefore close all with my uncessant prayers, that the great andeverlasting Jehovah would, for the sake of his blessed Son, our mostglorious intercessor, rebuke Satan, and so vanquish him, from time totime, that his power may be more and more every day suppressed, hiskingdom destroyed; and that all his malicious and accursed instrumentsin those spiritual wickednesses may gnash their teeth, melt away, andbe ashamed in their secret places, till they come to be judged andcondemned unto the place of everlasting burnings prepared for theDevil and his angels, that they may there be tormented with him forever and ever. 

III. 

LETTER FROM R. P. TO JONATHAN CORWIN. 

SALISBURY, Aug. 9, 1692. 

HONORED SIR, --According as in my former to you I hinted that I heldmyself obliged to give you some farther account of my rude thoughsolemn thoughts of that great case now before you, the happymanagement whereof do so much conduce to the glory of God, the safetyand tranquillity of the country, besides what I have said in my formerand the enclosed, I further humbly present to consideration thedoubtfulness and unsafety of admitting spectre testimony against thelife of any that are of blameless conversation, and plead innocent, from the uncertainty of them and the incredulity of them; for as fordiabolical visions, apparitions, or representations, they are morecommonly false and delusive than real, and cannot be known when theyare real and when feigned, but by the Devil's report; and then not tobe believed, because he is the father of lies. 

1. Either the organ of the eye is abused and the senses deluded, so asto think they do see or hear some thing or person, when indeed they donot, and this is frequent with common jugglers. 

2. The Devil himself appears in the shape and likeness of a person orthing, when it is not the person or thing itself; so he did in theshape of Samuel. 

3. And sometimes persons or things themselves do really appear, buthow it is possible for any one to give a true testimony, whichpossibly did see neither shape nor person, but were deluded; and ifthey did see any thing, they know not whether it was the person or buthis shape. All that can be rationally or truly said in such a case isthis, --that I did see the shape or likeness of such a person, if mysenses or eyesight were not deluded: and they can honestly say nomore, because they know no more (except the Devil tells them more);and if he do, they can but say he told them so. But the matter isstill incredible: first, because it is but their saying the Devil toldthem so; if he did so tell them, yet the verity of the thing remainsstill unproved, because the Devil was a liar and a murtherer (Johnviii. 44), and may tell these lies to murder an innocent person. 

But this case seems to be solved by an assertion of some, that affirmthat the Devil do not or cannot appear in the shape of a godly person, to do hurt: others affirm the contrary, and say that he can and oftenhave so done, of which they give many instances for proof of whatthey say; which if granted, the case remains yet unsolved, and yet thevery hinge upon which that weighty case depends. To which I humblysay: First, That I do lament that such a point should be so needful tobe determined, which seems not probable, if possible, to be determinedto infallible satisfaction for want of clear Scripture to decide itby, though very rational to be believed according to rules; as, forinstance, if divers examples are alleged of the shape of persons thathave been seen, of whom there is ample testimony that they lived anddied in the faith, yet, saith the objecter, 'tis possible they may behypocrites, therefore the proof not infallible: and as it may admit ofsuch an objection against the reasons given on the affirmative, muchmore may the same objection be made against the negative, for whichthey can or do give no reason at all, nor can a negative be proved(therefore difficult to be determined to satisfy infallibly); but, seeing it must be discussed, I humbly offer these few words: First, Ihumbly conceive that the saints on earth are not more privileged inthat case than the saints in heaven; but the Devil may appear in theshape of a saint in heaven, namely, in the shape of Samuel (1 Sam. Xxviii. 13, 14); therefore he can or may represent the shape of asaint that is upon the earth. Besides, there may be innocent personsthat are not saints, and their innocency ought to be their security, as well as godly men's; and I hear nobody question but the Devil maytake their shape. 

Secondly, It doth not hurt any man or woman to present the shape orlikeness of an innocent person, more than for a limner or carver todraw his picture, and show it, if he do not in that form do some evil(nor then neither), if the laws of man do not oblige him to suffer forwhat the Devil doth in his shape, the laws of God do not. 

Thirdly, The Devil had power, by God's permission, to take the veryperson of our Lord Jesus Christ, in the day or time of hishumiliation, and carry him from place to place, and tempted him withtemptations of horrid blasphemy, and yet left him innocent. Why may wenot suppose the like may be done to a good man? And why not much moreappear in his shape (or make folk think it is his shape, when indeedit is not), and yet the person be innocent, being far enough off, andnot knowing of it, nor would consent if he had known it, hisprofession and conversation being otherwise?

Fourthly, I suppose 'tis granted by all, that the person of one thatis dead cannot appear, because the soul and body are separated, and sothe person is dissolved, and so ceaseth to be: and it is as certainthat the person of the living cannot be in two places at one time, buthe that is at Boston cannot be at Salem or Cambridge at the same time;but as the malice and envy in the Devil makes it his business to seekwhom he may devour, so no question but he doth infuse the same qualityinto those that leave Jesus Christ to embrace him, that they do envythose that are innocent, and upon that account be as ready to say andswear that they did see them as the Devil is to present their shape tothem. Add but this also, that, when they are once under his power, heputs them on headlong (they must needs go whom the Devil drives, saith the proverb), and the reason is clear, --because they are takencaptive by him, to do his will. And we see, by woful and undeniableexperience, both in the afflicted persons and the confessors, some ofthem, that he torments them at his pleasure, to force them to accuseothers. Some are apt to doubt they do but counterfeit; but, poorsouls! I am utterly of another mind, and I lament them with all myheart; but, take which you please, the case is the same as to the mainissue. For, if they counterfeit, the wickedness is the greater inthem, and the less in the Devil: but if they be compelled to it by theDevil, against their wills, then the sin is the Devil's, and thesufferings theirs; but if their testimonies be allowed of, to makepersons guilty by, the lives of innocent persons are alike in dangerby them, which is the solemn consideration that do disquiet thecountry. 

Now, that the only wise God may so direct you in all, that he may haveglory, the country peace and safety, and your hands strengthened inthat great work, is the desire and constant prayer of your humbleservant, R. P. , who shall no further trouble you at present. 

_Position. _--That to put a witch to death is the command of God, andtherefore the indispensable duty of man, --namely, the magistrate (Ex. Xxii. 18); which, granted, resolves two questions that I have heardmade by some:--

First, Whether there are any such creatures as witches in the world. Secondly, If there be, whether they can be known to be such by men:both which must be determined on the affirmative, or else thatcommandment were in vain. 

_Position Second. _--That it must be witches that are put to death, andnot innocent persons: "Thou shalt not condemn the innocent nor therighteous" (Ex. Xxiii. 7). 

_Query. _--Which premised, it brings to this query, --namely, how awitch may be known to be a witch. 

_Answer. _--First, By the mouth of two or three witnesses (Deut xix. 15; Matt. Xviii. 16; Deut. Xvii. 6). Secondly, They may be known bytheir own confession, being _compos mentis_, and not under horridtemptation to self-murther (2 Sam. Xvi. ; Josh. Vii. 16). 

_Query Second. _--What is it that those two or three witnesses mustswear? Must they swear that such a person is a witch? Will that do thething, as is vulgarly supposed?

_Answer. _--I think that is too unsafe to go by, as well as hard to bedone by the advised: First, because it would expose the lives of allalike to the pleasure or passion of those that are minded to take themaway; secondly, because that, in such a testimony, the witnesses arenot only informers in matter of fact, but sole judges of thecrime, --which is the proper work of the judges, and not of witnesses. 

_Query Third. _--What is it that the witnesses must testify in thecase, to prove one to be a witch?

_Answer. _--They must witness the person did put forth some act which, if true, was an act of witchcraft, or familiarity with the Devil, thewitness attest the fact to be upon his certain knowledge, and thejudges to judge that fact to be such a crime. 

_Query Fourth. _--What acts are they which must be proved to becommitted by a person, that shall be counted legal proof ofwitchcraft, or familiarity with the Devil?

_Answer. _--This I do profess to be so hard a question, for want oflight from the Word of God and laws of men, that I do not know what tosay to it; and therefore humbly conceive, that, in such a difficulty, it may be more safe, for the present, to let a guilty person live tillfurther discovery, than to put an innocent person to death. 

First, Because a guilty person may afterward be discovered, and so putto death; but an innocent person to be put to death cannot be broughtagain to life when once dead. 

Secondly, Because secret things belong to God only, but revealedthings to us and to our children. And though it be so difficultsometimes, yet witches there are, and may be known by some acts orother put forth by them, that may render them such; for Scriptureexamples, I can remember but few in the Old Testament, besides Balaam(Num. Xxii. 6, xxxi. 16). 

First, The sorcerers of Egypt could not tell the interpretation ofPharaoh's dream, though he told them his dream (Gen. Xli. 8): hissuccessors afterwards had sorcerers, that by enchantments did, first, turn their rods into serpents (Exod. Vii. 11, 12); second, turnedwater into blood; thirdly, brought frogs upon the land of Egypt (Exod. Viii. 7). 

Thirdly, Nebuchadnezzar's magicians said that they would tell him theinterpretation, if he would tell them his dream (Dan. Iv. 7); but theking did not believe them (ver. 8, 9). 

Fourthly, The Witch of Endor raised the Devil, in the likeness ofSamuel, to tell Saul his fortune; and Saul made use of him accordingly(1 Sam. Xxviii. 8, 11-15); and, as for New Testament, I see verylittle of that nature. Our Lord Jesus Christ did cast out many devils, and so did his disciples, both while he was upon earth and afterward, of which some were dreadfully circumstanced (Mark ix. 18; Mark v. 2-5); but of witches, we only read of four mentioned in the apostles'time: first, Simon Magus (Acts viii. 9, 11); secondly, Elymas thesorcerer (Acts xiii. 6, 8); thirdly, the seven sons of Sceva, a Jew, that were vagabond Jews, --exorcists (Acts xix. 13-16); fourthly, thegirl which, by a spirit of divination, brought her master much gain(Acts xvi. 16), whether it were by telling fortunes or finding outlost things, as our cunning men do, is not said; but something it wasthat was done by that spirit which was in her, which, being cast out, she could not do. Now, whatever was done by any of these, by the helpof the Devil, or by virtue of familiarity with him, or that the Devildid do by their consent or instigation, it is that which, the likebeing now proved to be done by others, is legal conviction ofwitchcraft, or familiarity with the Devil. 

As I remember, Mr. Perkins apprehends witchcraft may be sometimescommitted by virtue of an implicit covenant with the Devil, thoughthere be not explicit covenant visibly between them; namely, by usingsuch words and gestures whereby they do intimate to the Devil whatthey would have him do, and he doth it. 

3. To tell events contingent, or to bring any thing to pass bysupernatural means, or by no means. 

I have heard of some that make a circle, and mumble over some uncouthwords; and some that have been spiteful and suspicious persons, thathave sent for a handful of thatch from the house or barn of him thatthey have owed a spite to, and the house have been burnt as they hadburnt the thatch that they fetched. 

When Captain Smith was cast away in the ship built by Mr. Stevens atGloucester, many years ago, it was said that the woman that wasaccused for doing it did put a dish in a pail of water, and sent hergirl several times to see the motion of the dish, till at last it wasturned over, and then the woman said, "Now Smith is gone, " _or_ "iscast away. "

A neighbor of mine, who was a Hampshire man, told me that a suspectedwoman desired something of some of the family, which being denied, sheeither muttered or threatened, and some evil suddenly followed, andthey put her into a cart to carry her to Winchester; and, when theyhad gone a little way, the team could not move the cart, though inplain ground. The master commanded to carry a knitch of straw, andburn her in the cart; which to avoid, she said they should go along, and they did. This they did several times before they came toWinchester, of which passages the men that went with her gave theiroaths, and she was executed. 

Some have been transformed into dogs, cats, hares, hogs, and othercreatures; and in those shapes have sometimes received wounds whichhave made them undeniably guilty, and so confessed. Sometimes havingtheir imps sucking them, or infallible tokens that they are sucked, inthe search of which great caution to be given, because of somesuperfluities of nature, and diseases that people are incident unto, as the piles, &c. , of which the judges are, upon the testimony of thewitnesses, to determine what of crime is proved by any of thesecircumstances, with many other, in which God is pleased many times, bysome overt acts, to bring to light that secret wickedness to apparentconviction, sometimes by their own necessitated confession, wherebythose that he hath commanded to be put to death may be known to besuch, which, when known, then it is a duty to put them to death, andnot before, though they were as guilty before as then. 

There are two queries more with respect to what is proper to us inthis juncture of time, of which we have no account of the like beingcommon at other times, or in other places; namely, these, --

_Query Fifth. _--The fifth query is, what we are to think of thosepersons at Salem, or the Village, before whom people are brought fordetection, or otherwise to be concerned with them, in order to theirbeing apprehended or acquitted. 

_Answer_. --That I am, of all men, the least able to give anyconjecture about it, because I do not know it, having myself neverseen it, nor know nothing of it but by report, in which there must besupposed a possibility of some mistake, in part or in whole; but thatwhich I have here heard is this: First, That they do tell who arewitches, of which some they know, and some they do not. Secondly, Theytell who did torment such and such a person, though they know not theperson. Thirdly, They are tormented themselves by the looks of personsthat are present, and recovered again by the touching of them. Fourthly, That, if they look to them, they fall down tormented; but, if the persons accused look from them, they recover, or do not fallinto that torment. Fifthly, They can tell when a person is comingbefore they see them, and what clothes they have, and some what theyhave done for several years past, which nobody else ever accused themwith, nor do not yet think them guilty of. Sixthly, That the dead outof their graves do appear unto them, and tell them that they have beenmurdered, and require them to see them to be revenged on themurtherers, which they name to them; some of which persons are wellknown to die their natural deaths, and publicly buried in the sight ofall men. Now, if these things be so, I thus affirm, --

First, That whatsoever is done by them that is supernatural, is eitherdivine or diabolical. 

Secondly, That nothing is, or can be, divine, but what have God'sstamp upon it, to which he refers for trial (Isa. Viii. 19, 20): "Ifthey speak not according to these, there is no light in them. "

Thirdly, And by that rule none of these actions of theirs have anywarrant in God's word, but condemned wholly. 

First, It is utterly unlawful to inquire of the dead, or to beinformed by them (Isa. Viii. 19). It was an act of the Witch of Endorto raise the dead, and of a reprobate Saul to inquire of him (1 Sam. Xxviii. 8, 11-14; Deut. Xviii. 11). 

Secondly, It is a like evil to seek to them that have familiar spirits(Lev. Xix. 31). It was the sin of Saul in the forementioned place (1Sam. Xxviii. 8); and of wicked Manasses (2 Kings, xxi. 6). 

Thirdly, No more is it likely that their racking and tormenting shouldbe done by God or good angels, but by the Devil, whose manner haveever been to be so employed. Witness his dealing with the poor child(Mark ix. 17, 19, 20-22); and with the man that was possessed by him(Mark v. 2-5); besides what he did to Job (Job ii. 7); and all thelies that he told against him to the very face of God. 

Fourthly, The same may be rationally said of all the rest. Who shouldtell them things that they do not see, but the Devil; especially whensome things that they tell are false and mistaken?

_Query Sixth_. --These things premised, it now comes to the last andgreatest question or query; namely, How shall it be known when theDevil do any of these acts of his own proper motion, without humanconcurrence, consent, or instigation, and when he doth it by thesuggestion or consent of any person? This question, well resolved, would do our business. 

First, That the Devil can do acts supernatural without the furtheranceof him by human consent or concurrence; but men or women cannot dothem without the help of the Devil (must be granted). That granted, itfollows, that the Devil is always the doer, but whether abetted in itby anybody is uncertain. 

Secondly, Will it be sufficient for the Devil himself to say such aman or woman set him a work to torment such a person by looking uponhim? Is the Devil a competent witness in such a case?

Thirdly, Or are those that are tormented by him legal witnesses to saythat the Devil doth it by the procurement of such a person, whenasthey know nothing about it but what comes to them from the Devil (thattorments them)?

Fourthly, May we believe the witches that do accuse any one becausethey say so (can the fruit be better than the tree)? If the root ofall their knowledge be the Devil, what must their testimony be?

Fifthly, Their testimony may be legal against themselves, because theyknow what themselves do, but cannot know what another doth but byinformation from the Devil: I mean in such cases when the personaccused do deny it, and his conversation is blameless (Prov. Xviii. 5;Prov. Xix. 5). 

First, It is directly contrary to the use of reason, the law ofnature, and principles of humanity, to deny it, and plead innocent, when accused of witchcraft, and yet, at the same time, to be actingwitchcraft in the sight of all men, when they know their lives lie atstake by doing it. Self-interest teaches every one better. 

Secondly, It is contrary to the Devil's nature, or common practice, toaccuse witches. They are a considerable part of his kingdom, whichwould fall, if divided against itself (Matt. Xii. 26); except we thinkhe that spake the words understood not what he said (which wereblasphemy to think); or that those common principles or maxims are nowchanged; or that the Devil have changed his nature, and is now becomea reformer to purge out witches out of the world, out of the country, and out of the churches; and is to be believed, though a liar and amurtherer from the beginning, and also though his business is goingabout continually, seeking whom he may destroy (1 Pet. V. 8); and hispeculiar subject of his accusation are the brethren: called theaccuser of the brethren. 

_Objection. _--God do sometimes bring things to light by his providencein a way extraordinary. 

_Answer. _--It is granted God have so done, and brought hidden thingsto light, which, upon examination, have been proved or confessed, andso the way is clear for their execution; but what is that to thiscase, where the Devil is accuser and witness?

IV. 

EXTRACTS FROM MR. PARRIS'S CHURCH RECORDS. 

 [The following passages are taken from the records of the Salem Village Church, as specimens of Mr. Parris's style of narrative in that interesting document, and as shedding some light upon the subject of these volumes:--]

Sab: 4 Nov. [1694]. --After sermon in the afternoon, it waspropounded to the brethren, whether the church ought not to inquireagain of our dissenting brethren after the reason of their dissent. Nothing appearing from any against it, it was put to vote, and carriedin the affirmative (by all, as far as I know, except one brother, Josh: Rea), that Brother Jno. Tarbell should, the next Lord's Day, appear and give in his reasons in public; the contrary beingpropounded, if any had aught to object against it. But no dissent wasmanifested; and so Brother Nathaniel Putnam and Deacon Ingersoll weredesired to give this message from the church to the said BrotherTarbell. 

Sab: 11 Nov. --Before the evening blessing was pronounced, BrotherTarbell was openly called again and again; but, he not appearing, application was made to the abovesaid church's messengers for hisanswer: whereupon said Brother Putnam reported that the said BrotherTarbell told him he did not know how to come to us on a Lord's Day, but desired rather that he might make his appearance some week-day. Whereupon the congregation was dismissed with the blessing: and thechurch stayed, and, by a full vote, renewed their call of said BrotherTarbell to appear the next Lord's Day for the ends abovesaid; andDeacon Putnam and Brother Jonathan Putnam were desired to be itsmessengers to the said dissenting brother. 

Sab: 18 Nov. --The said brother came in the afternoon; and, aftersermon, he was asked the reasons for his withdrawing: whereupon heproduced a paper, which he was urged to deliver to the pastor tocommunicate to the church; but he refused it, asking who was thechurch's mouth. To which, when he was answered, "The pastor, " hereplied, Not in this case, because his offence was with him. Thepastor demanded whether he had offence against any of the churchbesides the pastor. He answered, "No. " So at length we suffered anon-member, Mr. Jos: Hutchinson, to read it. After which the pastorread openly before the whole congregation his overtures for peace andreconciliation. After which said Tarbell, seemingly (at least) muchaffected, said, that, if half so much had been said formerly, it hadnever come to this. But he added that others also were dissatisfiedbesides himself: and therefore he desired opportunity that they mightcome also, which was immediately granted; viz. , the 26 instant, at twoo'clock. 

26 Nov. --At the public meeting above appointed at the meeting-house, after the pastor had first sought the grace of God with us in prayer, he then summed up to the church and congregation (among which wereseveral strangers) the occasion of our present assembling, as ishinted the last meeting. Then seeing, together with Brother Tarbell, two more of our dissenting brethren, viz. , Sam: Nurse, and ThomasWilkins (who had, to suit their designs, placed themselves in a seatconveniently together), the church immediately, to save furthersending for them, voted that said Brother Wilkins and Brother Nurseshould now, together with Brother Tarbell, give in their reasons ofwithdrawing from the church. Then the pastor applied himself to allthese three dissenters, pressing the church's desire upon them. Sothey produced a paper, which they much opposed the coming into thepastor's hands, and his reading of it; but at length they yielded toit. Whilst the paper was reading, Brother Nurse looked upon another(which he said was the original): and, after it was read throughout, he said it was the same with what he had. Their paper was asfolloweth:--

"The reasons why we withdraw from communion with the church of SalemVillage, both as to hearing the word preached, and from partaking withthem at the Lord's Table, are as followeth:--

"1. Why we attend not on public prayer and preaching the word, theseare, (1. ) The distracting and disturbing tumults and noises made bythe persons under diabolical power and delusions, preventing sometimesour hearing and understanding and profiting of the word preached; wehaving, after many trials and experiences, found no redress in thiscase, accounted ourselves under a necessity to go where we might hearthe word in quiet. (2. ) The apprehensions of danger of ourselves beingaccused as the Devil's instruments to molest and afflict the personscomplaining, we seeing those whom we had reason to esteem better thanourselves thus accused, blemished, and of their lives bereaved, foreseeing this evil, thought it our prudence to withdraw. (3. ) Wefound so frequent and positive preaching up some principles andpractices by Mr. Parris, referring to the dark and dismal mysteries ofiniquity working amongst us, as was not profitable, but offensive. (4. ) Neither could we, in conscience, join with Mr. Parris in many ofthe requests which he made in prayer, referring to the trouble thenamong us and upon us; therefore thought it our most safe and peaceableway to withdraw. 

"2. The reasons why we hold not communion with them at the Lord'sTable are, first, we esteem ourselves justly aggrieved and offendedwith the officer who doth administer, for the reasons following: (1. )From his declared and published principles, referring to ourmolestation from the invisible world, differing from the opinion ofthe generality of the Orthodox ministers of the whole country. (2. )His easy and strong faith and belief of the affirmations andaccusations made by those they call the afflicted. (3. ) His layingaside that grace which, above all, we are required to put on; namely, charity toward his neighbors, and especially towards those of hischurch, when there is no apparent reason for the contrary. (4. ) Hisapproving and practising unwarrantable and ungrounded methods fordiscovering what he was desirous to know referring to the bewitched orpossessed persons, as in bringing some to others, and by and from thempretending to inform himself and others who were the Devil'sinstruments to afflict the sick and pained. (5. ) His unsafe andunaccountable oath, given by him against sundry of the accused. (6. )His not rendering to the world so fair, if true, an account of what hewrote on examination of the afflicted. (7. ) Sundry unsafe, if sound, points of doctrine delivered in his preaching, which we esteem notwarrantable, if Christian. (8. ) His persisting in these principles, and justifying his practices, not rendering any satisfaction to uswhen regularly desired, but rather further offending and dissatisfyingourselves. 

"JOHN TARBELL. THO: WILKINS. SAM: NURSE. "

When the pastor had read these charges, he asked the dissenters abovementioned whether they were offended with none in the church besideshimself. They replied, that they articled against none else. Then theofficer asked them if they withdrew from communion upon account ofnone in the church besides himself. They answered, that they withdrewonly upon my account. Then I read them my "Meditations for Peace, "mentioned 18 instant; viz. :--

"Forasmuch as it is the undoubted duty of all Christians to pursuepeace (Ps. Xxxiv. 14), even unto a reaching of it, if it be possible(Rom. Xii. 18, 19); and whereas, through the righteous, sovereign, andawful Providence of God, the Grand Enemy to all Christian peace has, of late, been most tremendously let loose in divers places hereabouts, and more especially amongst our sinful selves, not only to interruptthat partial peace which we did sometimes enjoy, but also, through hiswiles and temptations and our weaknesses and corruptions, to makewider breaches, and raise more bitter animosities between too many ofus, in which dark and difficult dispensation we have been all, or mostof us, of one mind for a time, and afterwards of differingapprehensions, and, at last, are but in the dark, --upon seriousthoughts of all, and after many prayers, I have been moved to presentto you (my beloved flock) the following particulars, in way ofcontribution towards a regaining of Christian concord (if so be weare not altogether unappeasable, irreconcilable, and so destitute ofthe good spirit which is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easyto be entreated, James iii. 17); viz. , (1. ) In that the Lord orderedthe late horrid calamity (which afterwards, plague-like, spread inmany other places) to break out first in my family, I cannot but lookupon as a very sore rebuke, and humbling providence, both to myselfand mine, and desire so we may improve it. (2. ) In that also in myfamily were some of both parties, viz. , accusers and accused, I lookalso upon as an aggravation of the rebuke, as an addition of wormwoodto the gall. (3. ) In that means were used in my family (though totallyunknown to me or mine, except servants, till afterwards) to raisespirits and create apparitions in no better than a diabolical way, Ido look upon as a further rebuke of Divine Providence. And by all, Ido humbly own this day, before the Lord and his people, that God hasbeen righteously spitting in my face (Num. Xii. 14). And I desire tolie low under all this reproach, and to lay my hand upon my mouth. (4. ) As to the management of those mysteries, as far as concernsmyself, I am very desirous (upon farther light) to own any errors Ihave therein fallen into, and can come to a discerning of. In the meanwhile, I do acknowledge, upon after-considerations, that, were thesame troubles again, (which the Lord, of his rich mercy, for everprevent), I should not agree with my former apprehensions in allpoints; as, for instance, (1. ) I question not but God sometimessuffers the Devil (as of late) to afflict in the shape of not onlyinnocent but pious persons, or so delude the senses of the afflictedthat they strongly conceit their hurt is from such persons, when, indeed, it is not. (2. ) The improving of one afflicted to inquire by, who afflicts the others, I fear may be, and has been, unlawfully used, to Satan's great advantage. (3. ) As to my writing, it was put upon meby authority; and therein I have been very careful to avoid thewronging of any (_a_). (4). As to my oath, I never meant it, nor do Iknow how it can be otherwise construed, than as vulgarly and every oneunderstood; yea, and upon inquiry, it may be found so worded also. (5. ) As to any passage in preaching or prayer, in that sore hour ofdistress and darkness, I always intended but due justice on each hand, and that not according to man, but God (who knows all things mostperfectly), however, through weakness or sore exercise, I mightsometimes, yea, and possibly sundry times, unadvisedly expressedmyself. (6. ) As to several that have confessed against themselves, they being wholly strangers to me, but yet of good account with bettermen than myself, to whom also they are well known, I do not pass somuch as a secret condemnation upon them; but rather, seeing God has soamazingly lengthened out Satan's chain in this most formidableoutrage, I much more incline to side with the opinion of those thathave grounds to hope better of them. (7. ) As to all that have undulysuffered in these matters (either in their persons or relations), through the clouds of human weakness, and Satan's wiles and sophistry, I do truly sympathize with them; taking it for granted that such asdrew themselves clear of this great transgression, or that havesufficient grounds so to look upon their dear friends, have herebybeen under those sore trials and temptations, that not an ordinarymeasure of true grace would be sufficient to prevent a bewraying ofremaining corruption. (8. ) I am very much in the mind, and abundantlypersuaded, that God (for holy ends, though for what in particular isbest known to himself) has suffered the evil angels to delude us onboth hands, but how far on the one side or the other is much above meto say. And, if we cannot reconcile till we come to a full discerningof these things, I fear we shall never come to agreement, or, atsoonest, not in this world. Therefore (9), in fine, The matter beingso dark and perplexed as that there is no present appearance that allGod's servants should be altogether of one mind, in all circumstancestouching the same, I do most heartily, fervently, and humbly beseechpardon of the merciful God, through the blood of Christ, of all mymistakes and trespasses in so weighty a matter; and also all yourforgiveness of every offence in this and other affairs, wherein yousee or conceive I have erred and offended; professing, in the presenceof the Almighty God, that what I have done has been, as for substance, as I apprehended was duty, --however through weakness, ignorance, &c. , I may have been mistaken; I also, through grace, promising each of youthe like of me. And so again, I beg, entreat, and beseech you, thatSatan, the devil, the roaring lion, the old dragon, the enemy of allrighteousness, may no longer be served by us, by our envy and strifes, where every evil work prevails whilst these bear sway (Isa. Iii. 14-16); but that all, from this day forward, may be covered with themantle of love, and we may on all hands forgive each other heartily, sincerely, and thoroughly, as we do hope and pray that God, forChrist's sake, would forgive each of ourselves (Matt. Xviii. 21 _adfinem_; Col. Iii. 12, 13). Put on, therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long-suffering, forbearing one another, and forgiving oneanother. If any man have a quarrel against any, even as Christ forgaveyou, so also do ye (Eph. Iv. 31, 32). Let all bitterness and wrath andanger and clamor and evil-speaking be put away from you, with allmalice; and be ye kind one to another, tender-hearted, forgiving oneanother, even as God, for Christ's sake, hath forgiven you. Amen, amen. 

SAM: PARRIS. 

"26 Nov. , 1694. "

 [In the record, off against (a) as above, the following is in Mr. Parris's writing:]

(_a_) Added, by the desire of the council, this following paragraph;viz. , Nevertheless, I fear, that, in and through the throng of themany things written by me, in the late confusions, there has not beena due exactness always used; and, as I now see the inconveniency of mywriting so much on those difficult occasions, so I would lament everyerror of such writings. --Apr. 3, 1695. Idem. S. P. 

 [The above passage (_a_) is inserted in a marginal space left for it on a page containing the record of a meeting, Nov. 26, 1694, while it is dated April 3, 1695, and purports to be added "by the desire of the council, " which met at the last-named date. There are other indications, that the record of Mr. Parris's controversy with the dissatisfied brethren, consequent upon the proceedings in 1692, was made originally on separate sheets of paper, and then compiled, and inscribed in the church-book, as it there appears. There are several other entries, which refer to dates ahead. He probably made out his record near the close of the struggle which resulted in his dismission, and left it, on the pages of the book, as his history of the case. After giving his "Meditations for Peace, " the record goes on:--]

After I had read these overtures abovesaid, I desired the brethren todeclare themselves whether they remained still dissatisfied. BrotherTarbell answered, that they desired to consider of it, and to have acopy of what I had read. I replied, that then they must subscribetheir reasons (above mentioned), for as yet they were anonymous: so atlength, with no little difficulty, I purchased the subscription oftheir charges by my abovesaid overtures, which I gave, subscribed withmy name, to them, to consider of; and so this meeting broke up. Notethat, during this agitation with our dissenting brethren, theyentertained frequent whisperings with comers and goers to them andfrom them; particularly Dan: Andrews, and Tho: Preston from Mr. IsraelPorter, and Jos: Hutchinson, &c. 

Nov. 30, 1694. --Brother Nurse and Brother Tarbell (bringing with themJoseph Putnam and Tho: Preston) towards night came to my house, wherethey found the two deacons and several other brethren; viz. , Tho:Putnam, Jno. Putnam, Jr. , Benj. Wilkins, and Ezek: Cheever, besidesLieutenant Jno. Walcot. And Brother Tarbell said they came to answermy paper, which they had now considered of, and their answer was this;viz. , that they remained dissatisfied, and desired that the churchwould call a council, according to the advice we had lately fromministers. 

 [An account has been given, p. 493, of the attempts of the "dissatisfied brethren" to procure a mutual council to decide the controversy between them and Mr. Parris. On the 14th of June, 1694, a letter was addressed to him, advising him to agree to the call of such a council, signed by John Higginson, of the First Church in Salem; James Allen, of the First Church in Boston; John Hale, of the church in Beverly; Samuel Willard, of the Old South Church in Boston; Samuel Cheever, of the church in Marblehead; and Joseph Gerrish, of the church in Wenham. Nicholas Noyes joined in the advice, "with this proviso, that he be not chosen one of the council. " Mr. Parris contrived to avoid following the advice. On the 10th of September, Messrs. Higginson, Allen, Willard, Cheever, and Gerrish again, in earnest and quite peremptory terms, renewed their advice in another letter to Mr. Parris. No longer venturing to resist their authority, he yielded, and consented to a mutual council, upon certain terms, one of which was, that neither of the churches whose ministers had thus forced him to the measure should be of the council. The following passages give the conclusion of the matter, as related by Mr. Parris in his record-book:--]

Feb. 12 [1695]. --The church met again, as last agreed upon; and, aftera while, our dissenting brethren, Tho: Wilkins, Sam: Nurse, and Jno. Tarbell, came also. After our constant way of begging the presence ofGod with us, we desired our dissenting brethren to acquaint uswhether they would accept of our last proposals, which they desired tothis day to consider of. They answered, that they were willing to dropthe six churches from whose elders we had had the advice abovesaid, dated 14 June last; but they were not free to exclude Ipswich. Thisthey stuck unto long, and then desired that they might withdraw alittle to confer among themselves about it, which was granted. Butthey quickly returned, as resolved for Ipswich as before. We desiredthem to nominate the three churches they would have sent to: and, after much debate, they did; viz. , Rowley, Salisbury, and Ipswich. Whereupon we voted, by a full consent, Rowley and Salisbury churchesfor a part of the council, and desired them to nominate a thirdchurch. But still they insisted on Ipswich, which we told them theywere openly informed, the last meeting, that we had excepted against. Then they were told that we would immediately choose three otherchurches to join with the two before nominated and voted, if they sawnot good to nominate any more; or else we would choose two otherchurches to join with the aforesaid two, if they pleased. Theyanswered, they would be willing to that, if Ipswich might be one ofthem. Then it was asked them, if a dismission to some other Orthodoxchurch, where they might better please themselves, would content them. Brother Tarbell answered, "Ay, if we could find a way to remove ourlivings too. " Then it was propounded, whether we could not uniteamongst ourselves. The particular answer hereunto I remember not; but(I think) such hints were given by them as if it were impossible. Thusmuch time being gone, it being well towards sunset, and we concludingthat it was necessary that we should do something ourselves, if theywould not (as the elders had heretofore desired) accept of our joiningwith them, we dismissed them; and, by a general agreement amongstourselves, read and voted letters to the churches at North Boston, Weymouth, Maiden, and Rowley, for their help in a council. 

 [Mr. Parris's plan of finding refuge in an _ex-parte_ council was utterly frustrated. On the 1st of March, the "reverend elders in the Bay accounted it advisable, " as he expresses it in his records, that the First Church and the Old South Church in Boston should be added to the council. They wrote to him to that effect, and he had to comply. This brought James Allen and Samuel Willard into the council, and determined the character of the result, which, coming from a tribunal called by him to adjudicate the case, and hearing only such evidence as he laid before it, so far as it bore against him, was decisive and fatal. It was as follows:--]

The elders and messengers of the churches--met in council at SalemVillage, April 3, 1695, to consider and determine what is to be donefor the composure of the present unhappy differences in thatplace, --after solemn invocation of God in Christ for his direction, dounanimously declare and advise as followeth:--

I. We judge that, albeit in the late and the dark time of theconfusions, wherein Satan had obtained a more than ordinary liberty tobe sifting of this plantation, there were sundry unwarrantable anduncomfortable steps taken by Mr. Samuel Parris, the pastor of thechurch in Salem Village, then under the hurrying distractions ofamazing afflictions; yet the said Mr. Parris, by the good hand of Godbrought unto a better sense of things, hath so fully expressed it, that a Christian charity may and should receive satisfactiontherewith. 

II. Inasmuch as divers Christian brethren in the church of SalemVillage have been offended at Mr. Parris for his conduct in the timeof the difficulties and calamities which have distressed them, we nowadvise them charitably to accept the satisfaction which he hathtendered in his Christian acknowledgments of the errors thereincommitted; yea, to endeavor, as far as 'tis possible, the fullestreconciliation of their minds unto communion with him, in the wholeexercise of his ministry, and with the rest of the church (Matt. Vi. 12-14; Luke xvii. 3; James v. 16). 

III. Considering the extreme trials and troubles which thedissatisfied brethren in the church of Salem Village have undergone inthe day of sore temptation which hath been upon them, we cannot butadvise the church to treat them with bowels of much compassion, instead of all more critical or rigorous proceedings against them, forthe infirmities discovered by them in such an heart-breaking day. Andif, after a patient waiting for it, the said brethren cannot so farovercome the uneasiness of their spirits, in the remembrance of thedisasters that have happened, as to sit under his ministry, we advisethe church, with all tenderness, to grant them a dismission unto anyother society of the faithful whereunto they may desire to bedismissed (Gal. Vi. 1, 2; Ps. Ciii. 13, 14; Job xix. 21). 

IV. Mr. Parris having, as we understand, with much fidelity andintegrity acquitted himself in the main course of his ministry sincehe hath been pastor to the church in Salem Village, about his firstcall whereunto, we look upon all contestations now to be bothunreasonable and unseasonable; and our Lord having made him a blessingunto the souls of not a few, both old and young, in this place, weadvise that he be accordingly respected, honored, and supported, withall the regards that are due to a painful minister of the gospel (1Thess. V. 12, 13; 1 Tim. V. 17). 

V. Having observed that there is in Salem Village a spirit full ofcontentions and animosities, too sadly verifying the blemish whichhath heretofore lain upon them, and that some complaints broughtagainst Mr. Parris have been either causeless and groundless, orunduly aggravated, we do, in the name and fear of the Lord, solemnlywarn them to consider, whether, if they continue to devour oneanother, it will not be bitterness in the latter end; and beware lestthe Lord be provoked thereby utterly to deprive them of those whichthey should account their precious and pleasant things, and abandonthem to all the desolations of a people that sin away the mercies ofthe gospel (James iii. 16; Gal. V. 15; 2 Sam. Ii. 26; Isa. V. 4, 5, 6;Matt. Xxi. 43). 

VI. If the distempers in Salem Village should be (which God forbid!)so incurable, that Mr. Parris, after all, find that he cannot, withany comfort and service, continue in his present station, his removalfrom thence will not expose him unto any hard character with us, nor, we hope, with the rest of the people of God among whom we live (Matt. X. 14; Acts xxii. 18). 

All which advice we follow with our prayers that the God of peacewould bruise Satan under our feet. Now, the Lord of peace himself giveyou peace always by all means. 

INCREASE MATHER, _Moderator_. 

*JOSEPH BRIDGHAM. *EPHRAIM HUNT. *SAMUEL CHECKLEY. *NATHLL. WILLIAMS. *WILLIAM TORREY. SAMUEL PHILLIPS. *JOSEPH BOYNTON. JAMES ALLEN. *RICHARD MIDDLECOT. SAMUEL TORREY. *JOHN WALLEY. SAMUEL WILLARD. *JER: DUMMER. EDWARD PAYSON. *NEHEMIAH JEWET. COTTON MATHER. 

 [The names of the lay members of the Council are marked thus, *. They were persons of high standing in civil life. Samuel Checkley was not (as stated [Supplement, p. 494], through an inadvertence, of which, I trust, not many such instances can be found in these volumes) the Rev. Mr. Checkley, but his father, Col. Samuel Checkley, a citizen of Boston, of much prominence at the time. 

 The foregoing document is skilfully drawn. While kindly in its tone towards Mr. Parris, it is, in reality, a strong condemnation of his course, especially in Article I. , as also in the paragraph marked (_a_), (p. 549), "added by the desire of the Council" to his "Meditations for Peace. " Article III. Discountenances the proceedings of his church in its censure of "the dissatisfied brethren, " and requires that they should be recognized and treated as members in good standing. The fifth article administers rebuke with an equal hand to both sides, while the sixth and last recommends the removal of Mr. Parris, if the alienation of his opponents should prove "incurable. "

 As an authoritative condemnation of the proceedings related in this work, pronounced at the time, it is a fitting final close of the presentation of this subject. ]

THE END.