AMERICAN CLASSICS
SALEM WITCHCRAFT
With an Account of Salem Village
and
A History of Opinions on
Witchcraft and Kindred Subjects
CHARLES W. UPHAM
Volume II
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

THE PHILIP ENGLISH HOUSE.—Vol.
II., 142.
[ii.1]

PART THIRD.
WITCHCRAFT AT SALEM VILLAGE.
W E left Mr. Parris in the early part
of November, 1691, at the crisis of his controversy with the inhabitants of
Salem Village, under circumstances which seemed to indicate that its
termination was near at hand. The opposition to him had assumed a form which
made it quite probable that it would succeed in dislodging him from his
position. But the end was not yet. Events were ripening that were to give
him a new and fearful strength, and open a scene in which he was to act a
part destined to attract the notice of the world, and become a permanent
portion of human history. The doctrines of demonology had produced their
full effect upon the minds of men, and every thing was ready for a final
display of their power. The story of the Goodwin children, as told by Cotton
Mather, was known and read in all the dwellings of the land, and filled the
imaginations of a credulous age.
[ii.2]Deputy-governor Danforth
had begun the work of arrests; and persons charged with witchcraft,
belonging to neighboring towns, were already in prison.
Mr. Parris appears to have had in his family several slaves, probably
brought by him from the West Indies. One of them, whom he calls, in his
church-record book, "my negro lad," had died, a year or two before, at the
age of nineteen. Two of them were man and wife. The former was always known
by the name of "John Indian;" the latter was called "Tituba." These two
persons may have originated the "Salem witchcraft." They are spoken of as
having come from New Spain, as it was then called,—that is, the Spanish West
Indies, and the adjacent mainlands of Central and South America,—and, in all
probability, contributed, from the wild and strange superstitions prevalent
among their native tribes, materials which, added to the commonly received
notions on such subjects, heightened the infatuation of the times, and
inflamed still more the imaginations of the credulous. Persons conversant
with the Indians of Mexico, and on both sides of the Isthmus, discern many
similarities in their systems of demonology with ideas 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 the
proceedings at the village, may account for some of the features of the
transaction.
During the winter of 1691 and 1692, a circle of young girls had been
formed, who were in the habit of meeting at Mr. Parris's house for the
[ii.3]purpose
of practising palmistry, and other arts of fortune-telling, and of becoming
experts in the wonders of necromancy, magic, and spiritualism. It consisted,
besides the Indian servants, mainly of the following persons:—
Elizabeth, daughter of Mr. Parris, was nine years of age. She seems to
have performed a leading part in the first stages of the affair, and must
have been a child of remarkable precocity. It is a noticeable fact, that her
father early removed her from the scene. She was sent to the town, where she
remained in the family of Stephen Sewall, until the proceedings at the
village were brought to a close. Abigail Williams, a niece of Mr. Parris,
and a member of his household, was eleven years of age. She acted
conspicuously in the witchcraft prosecutions from beginning to end. Ann
Putnam, daughter of Sergeant Thomas Putnam, the parish clerk or recorder,
was twelve years of age. The character and social position of her parents
gave her a prominence which an extraordinary development of the imaginative
faculty, and of mental powers generally, enabled her to hold throughout.
This young girl is perhaps entitled to be regarded as, in many respects, the
leading agent in all the mischief that followed. Mary Walcot was seventeen
years of age. Her father was Jonathan Walcot (vol.
i. p. 225). His first wife, Mary Sibley, to whom he was married in 1664,
had died in 1683. She was the mother of Mary. It is a singular fact, and
indicates the estimation in which Captain Walcot was held, that, although
not a church-member, he filled the office of deacon of the parish[ii.4]
for several years before the formation of the church. Mercy Lewis was also
seventeen years of age. When quite young, she was, for a time, in the family
of the Rev. George Burroughs: and, in 1692, was living as a servant in the
family of Thomas Putnam; although, occasionally, she seems to have lived, in
the same capacity, with that of John Putnam, Jr., the constable of the
village. He was a son of Nathaniel, and resided in the neighborhood of
Thomas and Deacon Edward Putnam. Mercy Lewis performed a leading part in the
proceedings, had great energy of purpose and capacity of management, and
became responsible for much of the crime and horror connected with them.
Elizabeth Hubbard, seventeen years of age, who also occupies a bad eminence
in the scene, was a niece of Mrs. Dr. Griggs, and lived in her family.
Elizabeth Booth and Susannah Sheldon, each eighteen years of age, belonged
to families in the neighborhood. Mary Warren, twenty years of age, was a
servant in the family of John Procter; and Sarah Churchill, of the same age,
was a servant in that of George Jacobs, Sr. These two last were actuated, it
is too apparent, by malicious feelings towards the families in which they
resided, and contributed largely to the horrible tragedy. The facts to be
exhibited will enable every one who carefully considers them, to form an
estimate, for himself, of the respective character and conduct of these
young persons. It is almost beyond belief that they were wholly actuated by
deliberate and cold-blooded malignity. Their crime would, in that view, have
been[ii.5]
without a parallel in monstrosity of wickedness, and beyond what can be
imagined of the guiltiest and most depraved natures. For myself, I am unable
to determine how much may be attributed to credulity, hallucination, and the
delirium of excitement, or to deliberate malice and falsehood. There is too
much evidence of guile and conspiracy to attribute all their actions and
declarations to delusion; and their conduct throughout was stamped with a
bold assurance and audacious bearing. With one or two slight and momentary
exceptions, there was a total absence of compunction or commiseration, and a
reckless disregard of the agonies and destruction they were scattering
around them. They present a subject that justly claims, and will for ever
task, the examination of those who are most competent to fathom the
mysteries of the human soul, sound its depths, and measure the extent to
which it is liable to become wicked and devilish. It will be seen that other
persons were drawn to act with these "afflicted children," as they were
called, some from contagious delusion, 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 a woman, named
Bibber, who appears to have lived at Wenham. Another married woman,—spoken
of as "ancient,"—named Goodell, had also been in the[ii.6]
habit of attending their meetings; but she is not named in any of the
documents on file, and was probably withdrawn, at an early period, from
participating in the transaction.
In the course of the winter, they became quite skilful and expert in the
arts they were learning, and gradually began to display their attainments to
the admiration and amazement of beholders. At first, they made no charges
against any person, but confined themselves to strange actions,
exclamations, and contortions. They would creep into holes, and under
benches and chairs, put themselves into odd and unnatural postures, make
wild and antic gestures, and utter incoherent and unintelligible sounds.
They would be seized with spasms, drop insensible to the floor, or writhe in
agony, suffering dreadful tortures, and uttering loud and piercing outcries.
The attention of the families in which they held their meetings was called
to their extraordinary condition and proceedings; and the whole neighborhood
and surrounding country soon were filled with the story of the strange and
unaccountable sufferings of the "afflicted girls." No explanation could be
given, and their condition became worse and worse. The physician of the
village, Dr. Griggs, was called in, a consultation had, and the opinion
finally and gravely given, that the afflicted children were bewitched. It
was quite common in those days for the faculty to dispose of difficult cases
by this resort. When their remedies were baffled, and their skill at fault,
the patient was[ii.7]
said to be "under an evil hand." In all cases, the sage conclusion was
received by nurses, and elderly women called in on such occasions, if the
symptoms were out of the common course, or did not yield to the
prescriptions 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 of was the terrible
condition of the afflicted children in Mr. Parris's house, or wherever, from
time to time, the girls assembled. They were the objects of universal
compassion and wonder. The people flocked from all quarters to witness their
sufferings, and gaze with awe upon their convulsions. Becoming objects of
such notice, they were stimulated to vary and expand the manifestations of
the extraordinary influence that was upon them. They extended their
operations beyond the houses of Mr. Parris, and the families to which they
belonged, to public places; and their fits, exclamations, and outcries
disturbed the exercises of prayer meetings, and the ordinary services of the
congregation. On one occasion, on the Lord's Day, March 20th, when the
singing of the psalm previous to the sermon was concluded, before the person
preaching—Mr. Lawson—could come forward, Abigail Williams cried out, "Now
stand up, and name your text." When he had read it, in a loud and insolent
voice she exclaimed, "It's a long text." In the midst of the discourse, Mrs.
Pope broke in, "Now, there is enough of that." In the afternoon of the same
day, while re[ii.8]ferring
to the doctrine he had been expounding in the preceding service, Abigail
Williams rudely ejaculated, "I know no doctrine you had. If you did name
one, I have forgot it." An aged member of the church was present, against
whom a warrant on the charge of witchcraft had been procured the day before.
Being apprised of the proceeding, Abigail Williams spoke aloud, during the
service, calling by name the person about to be apprehended, "Look where she
sits upon the beam, sucking her yellow-bird betwixt her fingers." Ann
Putnam, joining in, exclaimed, "There is a yellow-bird sitting on the
minister's hat, as it hangs on the pin in the pulpit." Mr. Lawson remarks,
with much simplicity, that these things, occurring "in the time of public
worship, did something interrupt me in my first prayer, being so unusual."
But he braced himself up to the emergency, and went on with the service.
There is no intimation that Mr. Parris rebuked his niece for her disorderly
behavior. As at several other times, the people sitting near Ann Putnam had
to lay hold of her to prevent her proceeding to greater extremities, and
wholly breaking up the meeting. The girls were supposed to be under an
irresistible and supernatural impulse; and, instead of being severely
punished, were looked upon with mingled pity, terror, and awe, and made
objects of the greatest attention. Of course, where members of the
minister's family were countenanced in such proceedings, during the
exercises of public worship, on the Lord's Day, in the meeting-house, it was
not[ii.9]
strange that people in general yielded to the excitement. But all did not.
Several members of the family of Francis Nurse, Peter Cloyse and wife, and
Joseph Putnam, expressed their disapprobation of such doings being allowed,
and absented 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" belonged were led to
apply themselves to fasting and prayer, on which occasions the neighbors,
under the guidance of the minister, would assemble, and unite in invocations
to the Divine Being to interpose and deliver them from the snares and
dominion of Satan. The "afflicted children" who might be present would not,
as a general thing, interrupt the prayers while in progress, but would break
out with their wild outcries and convulsive 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 and earnest supplications to the throne of Mercy for
rescue from the power of the great enemy of souls. The ministers spent the
day in Mr. Parris's house, and the children performed their feats before
their eyes. The reverend gentlemen were astounded at what they saw, fully
corroborated the opinion of Dr. Griggs, and formally declared their belief
that the Evil One had commenced his operations with a bolder front and[ii.10]
on a broader scale than ever before in this or any other country.
This judgment of the ministers was quickly made known everywhere; and, if
doubt remained in any mind, it was suppressed by the irresistible power of
an overwhelming public conviction. Individuals were lost in the universal
fanaticism. Society was dissolved into a wild and excited crowd. Men and
women left their fields, their houses, their labors and employments, to
witness the awful unveiling of the demoniac power, and to behold the
workings of Satan himself upon the victims of his wrath.
It must be borne in mind, that it was then an established doctrine in
theology, philosophy, and law, that the Devil could not operate upon
mortals, or mortal affairs, except through the intermediate instrumentality
of human beings in confederacy with him, that is, witches or wizards. The
question, of course, in all minds and on all tongues, was, "Who are the
agents of the Devil in afflicting these girls? There must be some among us
thus acting, and who are they?" For some 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 so thoroughly prepared for the work, that it was
concluded to begin operations in earnest. The continued pressure upon the
"afflicted children," the earnest and importunate inquiry, on all sides,
"Who is it that bewitches you?" opened their lips in response, and[ii.11]
they began to select and bring forward their victims. One after another,
they cried 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 were Joseph
Hutchinson, Edward Putnam, Thomas Putnam, and Thomas Preston. This fact
shows how nearly unanimous, at this time, was the conviction that the
sufferings of the girls were the result of witchcraft. Joseph Hutchinson was
a firm-minded man, of strong common sense, and from his general character
and ways of thinking and acting, one of the last persons liable to be
carried away by a popular enthusiasm, and was found among the earliest
rescued from it. Thomas Preston was a son-in-law of Francis Nurse.
As all was ripe for the development of the plot, extraordinary means were
taken to give publicity, notoriety, and effect to the first examinations. On
the 1st of March the two leading magistrates of the neighborhood, men of
great note and influence, whose fathers had been among the chief founders of
the settlement, and who were Assistants,—that is, members of the highest
legislative and judicial body in the colony, combining with the functions of
a senate those of a court of last resort with most comprehensive
jurisdiction,—John Hathorne and Jonathan Corwin, entered the village, in
imposing array, escorted by the marshal, constables, and their aids, with
all the trappings of their offices; reined up at Nathaniel In[ii.12]gersoll's
corner, and dismounted at his door. The whole population of the
neighborhood, apprised of the occasion, was gathered on the lawn, or came
flocking along the roads. The crowd was so great that it was necessary to
adjourn to the meeting-house, which was filled at once by a multitude
excited to the highest pitch of indignation and abhorrence towards the
prisoners, and of curiosity to witness the novel and imposing spectacle and
proceedings. The magistrates took seats in front of the pulpit, facing the
assembly; a long table or raised platform being placed before them; and it
was announced, that they were ready to enter upon the examination. On
bringing in and delivering over the accused parties, the officers who had
executed the warrants stated that they "had made diligent search for images
and such like, but could find none." After prayer, Constable George Locker
produced the body of Sarah Good; and Constable Joseph Herrick, the bodies of
Sarah Osburn, and Tituba Mr. Parris's Indian woman. The evidence seems to
indicate, that, on these occasions, the prisoners were placed on the
platform, to keep them from the contact of the general crowd, and that all
might see them.
Sarah Good was first examined, the other two being removed from the house
for the time. In complaining of her, and bringing her forward first, the
prosecutors showed that they were well advised. There was a general
readiness to receive the charge against her, as she was evidently the object
of much prejudice in the neighborhood. Her husband, who was a weak,[ii.13]
ignorant, and dependent person, had become alienated from her. The family
were very poor; and she and her children had sometimes been without a house
to shelter them, and left to wander from door to door for relief. Whether
justly or not, she appears to have been subject to general obloquy. Probably
there was no one in the country around, against whom popular suspicion could
have been more readily directed, or in whose favor and defence less interest
could be awakened. She was a forlorn, friendless, and forsaken creature,
broken down by wretchedness of condition and ill-repute. The following are
the minutes of her examination, as found among 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.[ii.14]
"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[ii.15]
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 following is
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[ii.16]
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 of
questions put by the magistrate, Hathorne, based upon a foregone conclusion
of the prisoner's guilt, and expressive of a conviction, all along on his
part, that the evidence of "the afflicted" against her amounted to, and was,
absolute demonstration. It will also be noticed, that, severe as was the
opinion of her husband in reference to her general conduct, he could not be
made to say that he had ever noticed any thing in her of the nature of
witchcraft. The torments the girls affected to experience in looking at her
must have produced an overwhelming effect on the crowd, as they did on the
magistrate, and even on the poor, amazed creature herself. She did not seem
to doubt the reality of their sufferings. In this, and in all cases, it must
be remembered that the account of the examination comes to us from those who
were under the wildest excitement against the prisoners; that no counsel was
allowed them; that, if any thing was suffered to be said in their defence by
others, it has failed to reach us; that the accused persons were wholly
unaccustomed to such scenes and exposures, unsuspicious of the perils of a
cross-examination, or of an inquisition conducted with a design to entrap
and ensnare; and that what they did say was liable to be misunderstood, as
well as misrepresented. We cannot hear their story. All we know is from
parties[ii.17]
prejudiced, to the highest degree, against them. Sarah Good was an
unfortunate and miserable woman in her circumstances and condition: but,
from all that appears on the record, making due allowance for the credulity,
extravagance, prejudice, folly, or malignity of the witnesses; giving full
effect to every thing that can claim the character of substantial force
alleged against her, it is undeniable, that there was not, beyond the
afflicted girls, a particle of evidence to sustain the charge on which she
was arraigned; and that, in the worst aspect of her case, she was an object
for compassion, rather than punishment. Altogether, the proceedings against
her, which terminated with her execution, were cruel and shameful to the
highest degree.
On the conclusion of her examination, she was removed from the
meeting-house, and Sarah Osburn brought in. Her selection, as one of the
persons to be first cried out upon, was judicious. The public mind was
prepared to believe the charge against her. Her original name was Sarah
Warren. She was married, April 5, 1662, to Robert Prince, who belonged to a
leading family, and owned a valuable farm. He died early, leaving her with
two young children, James and Joseph.
In the early colonial period, it was the custom for persons who desired
to come from the old country to America, but had not the means to defray the
expenses of the passage, to let or sell themselves, for a greater or less
length of time, to individuals residing here who needed their service. The
practice continued[ii.18]
down to the present century. Emigrants who thus sold themselves for a period
of years were called "redemptioners." Alexander Osburn came over from
Ireland in this character. The widow of Robert Prince bought out the residue
of his time from the person to whom he was thus under contract, for fifteen
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, after Osburn had been dead some
years, a curious case was brought into court, in which the sons of Robert
Prince testified that Osburn treated their mother and them with great
cruelty and barbarity. They had become of age before their mother's death,
and had signed their names to a deed conveying away land belonging to their
patrimony. The object of the suit was to invalidate the conveyance by
proving that they were compelled by Osburn to sign the deed, he using
threats and violence upon them at the time. There was an extraordinary
conflict of testimony in the trial; some witnesses strongly corroborating
the accusations of the Princes, and some equally strong in vindication of
the character of Osburn. It was shown, that, in the opinion of several of
his neighbors, he was an industrious, respectable, and worthy person. It is
difficult to determine the precise merits of the case. After the death of
his wife, Osburn married Ruth, a daughter of William Cantlebury, and widow
of William Sibley.[ii.19]
She was a woman of unquestioned 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 were
reputable persons in all respects. He was well regarded as a citizen, and
often on the parish committee. Neither he nor the widow Sibley appear to
have been implicated in the witchcraft proceedings in any other particular
than that he testified that his then wife Sarah had not been for some time
at meeting. There is no indication that this was volunteer testimony. He and
his wife Ruth were among the firmest opponents of Mr. Parris. There is no
mention of his having had children by either of his American wives. His son
John, who probably came with him to the country, was an inhabitant of the
Village; and his name is on the rate-list, for the last time, in 1718, his
father having died some years before. The Osborne family, in this part of
the country, does not appear to have sprung from this source.
Without attempting to decide where, or in what proportions, the blame is
to be laid, the fact is evident, that the marriage of the widow Sarah Prince
to Alexander Osburn was an unhappy one. Her mind became depressed, if not
distracted. For some time, she had been bedridden. Of course, as she had
occupied a respectable social position, and was a woman of property, her
case naturally gave rise to scandal. Rumor was busy and gossip rife in
reference to her; and it was quite natural that she should have been
suggested[ii.20]
for the accusing girls to pitch upon. The following is an account of her
examination by the magistrates, 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.[ii.21]
"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.[ii.22]
"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 examining
magistrate. He took for granted, as we shall find to have been the case in
all instances, the guilt of the prisoner, and endeavored to entangle her by
leading questions, thus involving her in contradiction. By the force of his
own assumptions, he had compelled Sarah Good to admit the reality of the
sufferings of the girls, and that they must be caused by some one. The
amount of what she had said was, that, if caused by one or the other of
them, "then it must be Osburn," for she was sure of her own innocence. This
expression, to which she was driven in self-exculpation, was perverted by
the reporter, Ezekiel Cheever, and by the magistrate, into an indirect
confession 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 trick upon the other.
Considering the feeble condition of Sarah Osburn generally, the snares by
which she[ii.23]
was beset, the distressing and bewildering circumstances in which she was
placed, and the infirm state of her reason, as evidenced in her statement of
what she saw, or dreamed that she saw and heard,—not having a clear idea
which,—her answers, as reported by the prosecutors, show that her broken and
disordered mind was essentially truthful and innocent.
Sarah Osburn was removed from the meeting-house, and Tituba brought in
and 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.[ii.24]
"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.[ii.25]
"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.[ii.26]
"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 be
found in the second volume of the collection edited by Samuel G. Drake,
entitled the "Witchcraft Delusion in New England." It is in the handwriting
of Jonathan Corwin, very full and minute, and shows that the Indian woman
was familiar with all the ridiculous and monstrous fancies then prevalent.
The details of her statement cover nearly the whole ground of them. While
indicating, in most respects, a mind at the lowest level of general
intelligence, they give evidence of cunning and wariness in the highest
degree. This document is also valuable, as it affords information about
particulars, incidentally mentioned and thus rescued from oblivion, which[ii.27]
serve to bring back the life of the past. Tituba describes the dresses of
some of the witches: "A black silk hood, with a white silk hood under it,
with top-knots." One of them wore "a serge coat, with a white cap." The
Devil appeared "in black clothes sometimes, sometimes serge coat of other
color." She speaks of the "lean-to chamber" in the parsonage, and describes
an aërial night ride "up" to Thomas Putnam's. "How did you go? What did you
ride upon?" asked the wondering magistrate. "I ride upon a stick, or pole,
and Good and Osburn behind me: we ride taking hold of one another; don't
know how we go, for I saw no trees nor path, but was presently there when we
were up." In both reports, Tituba describes, quite graphically, the
likenesses in which the Devil appeared to his confederates; but Corwin gives
the details more fully than Cheever. What the latter reports of the
appearances in which the Devil accompanied Osburn, the former amplifies.
"The thing with two legs 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; is
about two or three feet high, and goeth upright like a man; and, last night,
it stood before the fire in Mr. Parris's hall."
It is quite evident that the part played by the Indian woman on this
occasion was pre-arranged. She had, from the first, been concerned with the
circle of girls in their necromantic operations; and her state[ii.28]ments
show the materials out of which their ridiculous and monstrous stories were
constructed. She said that there were four who "hurt the children." Upon
being pressed by the magistrate to tell who they were, she named Osburn and
Good, but did "not know who the others were." Two others were marked; but it
was not thought best to bring them out until these three examinations had
first been made to tell upon the public mind. Tituba had been apprised of
Elizabeth Hubbard's story, that she had been "pinched" that morning; and, as
well as "Lieutenant Fuller and others," had heard of the delirious
exclamation of Thomas Putnam's sick child during the night. "Abigail
Williams, that lives with her uncle Parris," had communicated to the Indian
slave the story of "the woman with two legs and wings." In fact, she had
been fully admitted to their councils, and made acquainted with all the
stories they were to tell. But, when it became necessary to avoid
specifications touching parties whose names it had been decided not to
divulge at that stage of the business, the wily old servant escapes further
interrogation, "I am blind now: I cannot see."
Proceedings connected with these examinations were continued several
days. The result appears, in the handwriting of John Hathorne, as follows:—
"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 [ii.29]
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.

[ii.30]
"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 into this
their final record, what they had unfairly tried to make Sarah Osborn
believe, that Sarah Good had been a witness against her. The jail at Ipswich
was at a distance of at least ten miles from the village meeting-house, by
any road that could then have been travelled. The transference of the
prisoners day after day must have been very fatiguing to a sick woman like
Sarah Osburn. Sarah Good seems to have been able to bear it. Samuel
Braybrook, an assistant constable, having charge of her, says, that, on the
way to Ipswich, she "leaped off her horse three times;" that she "railed
against the magistrates, and endeavored to kill herself." He further
testified, that, at the very time she was performing these feats, Thomas
Putnam's daughter, "at her father's house, declared the same." As Braybrook
was many miles from Thomas Putnam's house, at the moment when his wonderful
daughter exercised this miraculous extent of vision, it would have been more
satisfactory to have had some other testimony to the fact. I mention this to
show of what stuff the evidence in these cases was made, and the credulity
with which every thing was swallowed. The prisoners were put to examination
each day.
Osburn and Good steadily maintained their innocence. Tituba all along
declared herself guilty, and[ii.31]
accused the other two of having been with her in confederacy with the Devil.
Mr. Parris made the following deposition, in relation to these examinations,
to which he subsequently 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 have presented,
it will be seen how admirably the whole affair was arranged, so far as
concerned the part played by Tituba. She commences her testimony by
declaring her innocence. The afflicted children are instantly thrown into
torments, which, however,[ii.32]
subside as soon as she begins to confess. Immediately after commencing her
confession, and as she proceeds in it, she herself becomes tormented "in the
face of authority," before the eyes of the magistrates and the awestruck
crowd. Her power to afflict ceases as she breaks loose from her compact with
the Devil, who sends some unseen confederate, not then brought to light, to
wreak his vengeance upon her for having confessed. Tituba, as well as the
girls, showed herself an adept in the arts taught in the circle.
All we know of Sarah Osburn beyond this date are the following items in
the Boston jailer's bill "against the country," dated May 29, 1692: "To
chains for Sarah Good and Sarah Osburn, 14 shillings:" "To the keeping of
Sarah Osburn, from the 7th of March to the 10th of May, when she died, being
nine weeks and two days, £1. 3s. 5d."
The only further information we have of Tituba is from Calef, who says,
"The account she since gives of it is, that her master did beat her, and
otherwise abuse her, to make her confess and accuse (such as he called) her
sister-witches; and that whatsoever she said by way of confessing or
accusing others was the effect of such usage: her master refused 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 her fees." The jailer's charge for
her "diet in prison for a year and a month" appears in a shape that
corroborates Calef's statements, which were prepared for publication in
1697, and printed in London in 1700.[ii.33]
Although zealously devoted to the work of exposing the enormities connected
with the witchcraft prosecutions, there is no ground to dispute the veracity
of Calef as to matters of fact. What he says of the declarations of Tituba,
subsequent to her examination, is quite consistent with a critical analysis
of the details of the record of that examination. It can hardly be doubted,
whatever the amount of severity employed to make her act the part assigned
her, that she was used as an instrument to give effect to the delusion.
Now let us consider the state of things that had been brought about in
the village, and in the surrounding country, at the close of the first week
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 in their behalf; and a sentiment
of horror sunk deep into all hearts, at the dread demonstration of the
diabolical rage in their afflicted and tortured persons. A few, very few,
distrusted; but the great majority, ninety-nine in a hundred of all the
people, were completely swept into the torrent. Nathaniel Putnam and
Nathaniel Ingersoll were entirely deluded, and continued so to the end. Even
Joseph Hutchinson was, for a while, carried away. The physicians had all
given their opinion that the girls were suffering from an "evil hand." The
neighboring ministers, after a day's fasting and prayer, and a scrutinizing
inspection of the condition of the afflicted children, had given it, as[ii.34]
the result of their most solemn judgment, that it was a case of witchcraft.
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. The girls, Sunday after Sunday, were
under the malign influence, to the disturbance and affrightment of the
congregation. In all companies, in all families, all the day long, the
sufferings and distraction occurring in the houses of Mr. Parris, Thomas
Putnam, and others, and in the meeting-house, were topics of excited
conversation; and every voice was loud in demanding, every mind earnest to
ascertain, who were the 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 of the mischief could not be discovered, and put out of the way, no
one was safe for a moment. At length, when the girls cried out upon Good,
Osburn, and Tituba, there was a general sense of satisfaction and relief. It
was thought that Satan's power might be checked. The selection of the first
victims was well made. They were just the kind of persons whom the public
prejudice and credulity were prepared to suspect and condemn. Their
examination was looked for with the utmost interest, and all flocked to
witness the proceedings.
In considering the state of mind of the people, as they crowded into and
around the old meeting-house, we can have no difficulty in realizing the[ii.35]
tremendous effects of what there occurred. It was felt that then, on that
spot, the most momentous crisis in the world's history had come. A crime, in
comparison with which all other crimes sink out of notice, was being
notoriously and defiantly committed in their 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, with dread apprehension, was come to pass; and in that
village the great battle, on whose issue the preservation of the kingdom of
the Lord on the earth was suspended, had begun. Indeed, no language, no
imagery, no conception of ours, can adequately express the feeling of awful
and terrible solemnity with which all were overwhelmed. No body of men ever
convened in a more highly wrought state of excitement than pervaded that
assembly, when the magistrates entered, in all their stern authority, and
the scene opened on the 1st of March, 1692. A minister, probably Mr. Parris,
began, according to the custom of the times, with prayer. From what we know
of his skill and talent in meeting such occasions, it may well be supposed
that his language and manner heightened still more the passions of the hour.
The marshal, of tall 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 the
officious interference of the marshal, or other deluded or[ii.36]
evil-disposed persons,—who, like him, were permitted to interpose with
charges or abusive expressions,—to overawe and confound, involve in
contradictions, and mislead the poor creature, and force her to confess
herself guilty and accuse others. In due time, the "afflicted children" were
brought in; and a scene ensued, such as no person in that crowd or in that
generation had ever witnessed before. Immediately on being confronted with
the prisoner, and meeting her eye, they fell, as if struck dead, to the
floor; or screeched in agony; or went into fearful spasms or convulsive
fits; or cried out that they were pricked with pins, pinched, or throttled
by invisible hands. They were severally brought up to the prisoner, and,
upon touching her person, instantly became calm, quiet, and fully restored
to their senses. With one voice they all declared that Sarah Good had thus
tormented them, by her power as a witch in league with the Devil. The truth
of this charge, in the effect produced by the malign influence proceeding
from her, was thus visible to all eyes. All saw, too, how instantly upon
touching her the diabolical effect ceased; the malignant fluid passing back,
like an electric stream, into the body of the witch. The spectacle was
repeated once and again, the acting perfect, and the delusion consummated.
The magistrates and all present considered the guilt of the prisoner
demonstrated, and regarded her as wilfully and wickedly obstinate in not at
once confessing what her eyes, as well as theirs, saw. Her refusal to
confess was considered as the[ii.37]
highest proof of her guilt. They passed judgment against her, committed her
to the marshal, who hurried her to prison, bound her with cords, and loaded
her with irons; for it was thought that no ordinary fastenings could hold a
witch. Similar proceedings, with suitable variations, were had with Sarah
Osburn and Tituba. The confession of the last-named, the immediate relief
thereafter of the afflicted children, and the dreadful torments which Tituba
herself experienced, on the spot, from the unseen hand of the Devil wreaking
vengeance upon her, put the finishing touch to the delusion. The excitement
was kept up, and spread far and wide, by the officers and magistrates riding
in cavalcade, day after day, to and from the town and village; and by the
constables, with their assistants, carrying their manacled prisoners from
jail to jail in Ipswich, Salem, and Boston.
The point was now reached when the accusers could safely strike at higher
game. But time was taken to mature arrangements. Great curiosity was felt to
know who the other two were whom Tituba saw in connection with Good and
Osburn in their hellish operations. The girls continued to suffer torments
and fall in fits, and were constantly urged by large numbers of people,
going from house to house to witness their sufferings, to reveal who the
witches were that still afflicted them. When all was prepared, they began to
cry out, with more or less distinctness; at first, in significant but
general descriptions, and at last calling names. The next victim was also
well chosen. An account[ii.38]
has been given, in the
First Part, of the notoriety which circumstances had attached to Giles
Corey. In 1691 he became a member of the church, being then (Vol.
I. p. 182) eighty years of age. Four daughters, all probably by his
first wife Margaret, the only children of whom there is any mention, were
married to John Moulton, John Parker, 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 Salem burial-ground, Aug. 27, 1684. Martha was his third wife. Her
age is unknown. It was entered on the record of the village church, at the
time of her admission to it, April 27, 1690; but the figures are worn away
from the edge of the page. She was a very intelligent and devout person.
When the proceedings relating to witchcraft began, she did not approve of
them, and expressed her want of faith in the "afflicted children." She
discountenanced the whole affair, and would not follow the multitude to the
examinations; but was said to have spoken freely of the course of the
magistrates, saying that their eyes were blinded, and that she could open
them. It seemed to her clear that they were violating common sense and the
Word of God, and she was confident that she could convince them of their
errors. Instead of falling into the delusion, she applied herself with
renewed earnestness to keep her own mind under the influence of prayer, and[ii.39]
spent more time in devotion than ever before. Her husband, however, was
completely carried away by the prevalent fanaticism, believed all he heard,
and frequented the examinations and the exhibitions of the afflicted
children. This disagreement became quite serious. Her preferring to stay at
home, shunning the proceedings, and expressing her disapprobation of what
was going on, caused an estrangement between them. Her peculiar course
created comment, in which he and two of his sons-in-law took part. Some
strong expressions were used by him, because she acted so strangely at
variance with everybody else. Her spending so much time on her knees in
devotion was looked upon as a matter of suspicion. It was said that she
tried to prevent him from following up the examinations, and went so far as
to remove the saddle from the horse brought up to convey him to some meeting
at the village connected with the witchcraft excitement. Angry words,
uttered by him, were heard and repeated. As she was a woman of notable
piety, a professor of religion, and a member of the church, it was evident
that her case, if she were proceeded against, would still more heighten the
panic, and convulse the public mind. It would give ground for an idea which
the managers of the affair desired to circulate, that the Devil had
succeeded in making inroads into the very heart of the church, and was
bringing into confederacy with him aged and eminent church-members, who,
under color of their profession, threatened to extend his influence to the
overthrow of[ii.40]
all religion. It was, indeed, established in the popular sentiments, as a
sign and mark of the Devil's coming, that many professing godliness would
join his standard.
For a day or two, it was whispered round that persons in great repute for
piety were in the diabolical confederacy, and about to be unmasked. The name
of Martha Corey, whose open opposition to the proceedings had become known,
was passed among the girls in an under-breath, and caught from one to
another among those managing the affair. On the 12th of March, Edward Putnam
and Ezekiel Cheever, having heard Ann Putnam declare that Goody Corey did
often appear to her, and torture her by pinching and otherwise, thought it
their duty to go to her, and see what she would say to this complaint; "she
being in church covenant with us." They mounted their horses about "the
middle of the afternoon," and first went to the house of Thomas Putnam to
see his daughter Ann, to learn from her what clothes Goody Corey appeared to
her in, in order to judge whether she might not have been mistaken in the
person. The girl told them, that Goody Corey, knowing that they contemplated
making this visit, had just appeared in spirit to her, but had blinded her
so that she could not tell what clothes she wore. Highly wrought upon by the
extraordinary statement of the girl, which they received with perfect
credulity, the two brethren remounted, and pursued their way. Goody Corey
had heard that her name had been bandied about by the accusing girls: she
also knew that it was one of their[ii.41]
arts to pretend to see the clothes people were wearing at the time their
spectres appeared to them. This required, indeed, no great amount of
necromancy; as it is not probable that there 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 commenced
conversation, "in a smiling manner she said, 'I know what you are come for;
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 acknowledged that their visit
was in consequence of complaints made against her by the afflicted children.
She inquired whether they had undertaken to describe the clothes she then
wore. They answered that they had not, and proceeded to repeat what Ann
Putnam had said to them about her blinding her so that she could not see her
clothes. At this she smiled, no doubt at Ann's cunning artifice to escape
having to say what dress she then had on. She declared to the two brethren,
that "she did not think that there were any witches." After considerable
talk, in which they did not get much to further their purpose, they took
their leave. The account of this interview, given by Putnam and Cheever,
indicates that Martha Corey was a sensible, enlightened, and sprightly
woman, perfectly free from the delusion of the day, courteous in her manners
and bearing, and a Christian, well grounded in Scripture.
The two brethren returned forthwith to Thomas[ii.42]
Putnam's house. Ann told them that Goody Corey had not troubled her, nor her
spectre appeared, in their absence. She was not inclined to afford them an
opportunity to apply the test of the dress. Both the women showed great
acuteness and caution. As Corey expected the visit, and had heard that the
girls pretended to be able to say what dress persons were wearing, she
probably had attired herself in an unusual way on the occasion, to put them
at fault, and expose the falseness of their claims to preternatural
knowledge; and Ann Putnam—her sagacity suggesting the risk she was running
in the matter of Corey's dress—took refuge in the pretence of blindness. The
brethren were too much under delusion to see through the sharp practice of
both of them, but considered the fact of Corey's inquiring of them whether
Ann described her dress, as, under the circumstances, proof positive against
the former.
Wishing to make assurance doubly sure, and to fasten the charge upon
Martha Corey, the managers of the affair sent for her to come to the house
of Thomas Putnam two days after this conference. Edward Putnam was present,
and testified that his niece Ann, immediately upon the entrance of Goodwife
Corey, experienced the most dreadful convulsions and tortures and distinctly
and positively declared that Corey was the author of her sufferings. This
was regarded as conclusive evidence; and, on the 19th of March, a warrant
was issued for her arrest. She was brought to the house of Nathaniel
Ingersoll, on Monday the[ii.43]
21st; and the following is the account of her examination, in the
handwriting of Mr. Parris. The proceedings took place in the meeting-house
at the village. They were introduced by a prayer from the Rev. Nicholas
Noyes. On some of these occasions Mr. Hale and perhaps others, but usually
Mr. Noyes or Mr. Parris officiated. We may suppose, from what we know of
their general deportment in connection with these scenes, that their
performances, under the cover of a devotional exercise, expressed and
enforced a decided prejudgment of the case in hand against the prisoners,
and partook of the character of 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 ob[ii.44]serve
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[ii.45]
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[ii.46]
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.)[ii.47]
"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.[ii.48]
"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.)[ii.49]
"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 pres[ii.50]ent,
we committed Martha Corey, the wife of Giles Corey, of Salem Farms, unto
the gaol in Salem, as per mittimus then given out."

The foregoing is a full copy of the original document. One of Giles
Corey's daughters, Deliverance, had married, June 5, 1683, Henry Crosby, who
lived on land conveyed to him by her father in the immediate neighborhood.
He was the person whose written testimony was read by the magistrate. Its
purport seems to have been to prove that Martha Corey had said that the
accusing girls could not stand before her, and that the Devil could not
stand before her. She had, undoubtedly, great confidence in her own
innocence, and in the power of truth and prayer, to silence false accusers,
and expressed herself in the forcible language which Parris's report of the
examination shows that she was well able to use. It is almost amusing to see
how the pride of the magistrates was touched, and their wrath kindled, by
what she was reported to have said, "that the magistrates' and ministers'
eyes were blinded, and that she would open them." It rankled in Hathorne's
breast: he returns to it again and again, and works himself up to a higher
degree of resentment on each recurrence. Mr. Noyes's ire was[ii.51]
roused, and he, too, put in a stroke. It will be noticed, that she avoided a
contradiction of her husband, and could not be brought to give the names of
persons from whom she had received information. "If you will all go hang me,
how can I help it?" "Ye are all against me." "What can I do, when many rise
up against me?" "When all 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 to ensnare her, and to avoid compromising others; and it must be
allowed that she showed much presence and firmness of mind. Her request,
made at the opening of the examination, and at "sundry times," to "go to
prayer," somewhat confounded them. She probably was led to make and urge the
request particularly in consequence of the tenor of Mr. Noyes's prayer at
the opening. She felt that it was no more than fair that there should be a
prayer on her side, as well as on the other. It might well be feared, that,
if allowed to offer a prayer, coming from a person in her situation, an aged
professor, and one accustomed to express herself in devotional exercises, it
might produce a deep impression upon the whole assembly. To refuse such a
request had a hard look; but, as the magistrates saw, it never would have
done to have permitted it. It would have reversed the position of all
concerned. The latter part of the examination has the appearance that she
was suspected to be unsound on a particular article of the prevalent creed.
It is much to be regretted that the abrasion of the paper at the[ii.52]
folding has obliterated her last answer to this part of the inquisition. It
is singular that Mr. Parris has left the blank in her final answer. Probably
she used her customary expression, "I am a gospel 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 religious person,
and very much given to acts of devotion, constituted a serious obstacle, no
doubt, in the way of the prosecutors. Parris's record of the examination
shows how they managed to get over it. They gave the impression that her
frequent and long prayers were addressed to the Devil.
The disagreement between her and her husband, touching the witchcraft
prosecutions, brought him into a very uncomfortable predicament. With his
characteristic imprudence of speech, he had probably expressed himself
strongly against her unbelief in the sufferings of the girls and her refusal
to attend the exhibitions of their tortures, or the examination of persons
accused. He was, unquestionably, highly shocked and incensed at her open
repudiation of the whole doctrine of witchcraft. Although he had become, in
his old age, a professor and a fervently religious man, perhaps he fell
back, in his resentment of her course, into his life-long rough phrases, and
said that she acted as though the Devil was in her. He might have said that
she prayed like a witch. Being entirely carried away by the delusion, he had
his own marvellous stories to tell about his cattle's being be[ii.53]witched,
&c. His talk, undoubtedly, came to the ears of the prosecutors; and they
seem to have taken steps to induce him to come forward as a witness 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."
[ii.54]
The foregoing document does not express the idea that he thought his wife
was a witch. He states what he observed, and what happened to him and to his
cattle. He evidently supposed they were bewitched, and that he was
obstructed, in going to prayer, in a strange manner; but he does not, in
terms, charge it upon her. It gives an interesting insight of the innermost
domestic life of the period, in a farmhouse, and exhibits striking touches
of the character and ways of these two old people. It illustrates the state
of the imagination prevailing among those who were carried away by the
delusion. If an ox had a sprained muscle, or a cat a fit of indigestion, it
was thought to be the work of an evil hand. Poor old Giles had come late to
a religious life, and, it is to be feared, was a novice in prayer. It is no
wonder that he was not an adept in "uttering his desires," and experienced
occasionally some difficulty in arranging and expressing his devotional
sentiments.
There is something very singular in the appearance of the foregoing
deposition. Purporting to be a piece of testimony, it was not given in the
usual and regular way. It does not indicate before whom it was made. It is
not attested in the ordinary manner; apparently, was not sworn to in the
presence of persons authorized to act in such cases; was never offered in
court or anywhere. It is a disconnected paper found among the remnants of
the miscellaneous collection in the clerk's office, and is evidently an
unfinished document; the words in Italics, at the close, being erased by a
line running through them.[ii.55]
It is probable that the parties who tried to get the old man to testify
against his wife discovered that they could not draw any thing from him to
answer their designs, but that there was danger that his evidence would be
favorable to her, and gave up the attempt to use him on the occasion. The
fact that he would not lend himself to their purposes perhaps led to
resentment on their part, which may explain the subsequent proceedings
against him.
The document, in its chirography, suggests the idea that it was written
by Mr. Noyes, which is not improbable, as Corey was a member of his
congregation and church. Noyes was deeply implicated in the prosecutions,
and violent in driving them on. The handwriting of the original papers
reveals the agency of those who were the most busy in procuring evidence
against persons accused. That of Thomas Putnam occurs in very many
instances. But Mr. Parris was, beyond all others, the busiest and most
active prosecutor. The depositions of the child Abigail Williams, his niece
and a member of his family, were written by him, as also a great number of
others. He took down most of the examinations, put in a deposition of his
own whenever he could, and was always ready to indorse those of others.
It will be remembered, that, when Tituba was put through her examination,
she said "four women sometimes hurt the children." She named Good and Osburn,
but pretended to have been blinded as to the others. Martha Corey was, in
due time, as we[ii.56]
have seen, brought out. The fourth was the venerable head of a large and
prominent family, and a member of the mother-church in Salem. She had never
transferred her relations to the village church, with which, however, she
had generally worshipped, and probably communed. Being one of the chief
matrons of the place, she was seated in the meeting-house with ladies of
similar age and standing, occupying the same bench or compartment with the
widow of Thomas Putnam, Sr. The women were seated separately from the men;
and the only rule applied among them was eminence in years and
respectability.
It has always been considered strange and unaccountable, that a person of
such acknowledged worth as Rebecca Nurse, of infirm health and advanced
years, should have been selected among the early victims of the witchcraft
prosecutions. Jealousies and prejudices, such as often infest rural
neighborhoods, may have been engendered, in minds open to such influences,
by the prosperity and growing influence of her family. It may be that
animosities kindled by the long and violent land controversy, with which
many parties had been incidentally connected, lingered in some breasts.
There are decided indications, that the passions awakened by the angry
contest between the village and "Topsfield men," and which the collisions of
a half-century had all along exasperated and hardened, may have been
concentrated against the Nurses. Isaac Easty, whose wife was a sister of
Rebecca Nurse, and the Townes, who were her brothers or near kins[ii.57]men,
were the leaders of the Topsfield men. It is a significant circumstance, in
this connection, that to one of the most vehement resolutions passed at
meetings of the inhabitants of the village, against the claims of Topsfield,
Samuel Nurse, her eldest son, and Thomas Preston, her eldest son-in-law,
entered their protest on the record; and, on another 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, it naturally exposed them to the ill-will of the people
of the village. An analysis of the names and residences of the persons
proceeded against, throughout the prosecutions, will show to what an extent
hostile motives were supplied from this quarter. The families of Wildes,
How, Hobbs, Towne, Easty, and others who were "cried out" upon by the
afflicted children, occupied lands claimed by parties adverse to the
village. What, more than all these causes, was sufficient to create a
feeling against the Nurses, is the fact that they were opposed to the party
which had existed from the beginning in the parish composed originally of
the friends of Bayley. To crown the whole, when the excitement occasioned by
the extraordinary doings in Mr. Parris's family began to display itself, and
the "afflicted children" were brought into notice, the members of this
family, with the exception, for a time, of Thomas Preston, discountenanced
the whole thing. They absented themselves from meeting, on account of the
disturb[ii.58]ances
and disorders the girls were allowed to make during the services of worship,
in the congregation, on the Lord's Day. Unfriendly remarks, from whatever
cause, made in the hearing of the girls, provided subjects for them to act
upon. Some persons behind them, suggesting names in this way, whether
carelessly or with malicious intent, were guilty of all the misery that was
created and blood that was shed.
It became a topic of rumor, that Rebecca Nurse was soon to be brought
out. It reached the ears of her friends, and the following document comes 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, [ii.59]
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, was a
sister of John Hathorne, the examining magistrate, and the mother-in-law of
Joseph Putnam, who was among the very few that condemned the proceedings
from the first. She stood, therefore, between the two parties. The character
of each of the signers and indorsers of this interesting paper is sufficient
proof that its statements are truthful. It cannot but excite the most
af |