Ch. 1.3. Primary Source: Two Learned Opinions on the Witchcraft Trials
The Salem witch trials came to an end partly because of criticisms by a number of leaders of the Massachusetts Bay colony, especially Increase Mather, who was president of Harvard College, a prominent minister, and Cotton Mather’s father. Cotton Mather also wrote about these trials and the legal procedures that should be used in such cases. This section provides two excerpts, one from each of these two influential figures.
Questions: In the first excerpt, does Increase Mather believe in the reality of witches and witchcraft? Why does he object to the use of ‘spectral evidence’? On this point, compare and contrast the opinion of his son, Cotton Mather, in the second excerpt: what assumptions about evidence and about the law does Cotton Mather’s more detailed discussion reveal? How difficult would it be to convict somebody (like Susanna Martin) based on the guidelines described by Cotton Mather?
1. Increase Mather, Cases of Conscience Concerning Evil Spirits, 1692
In this essay Mather senior objects in particular to an overreliance on ‘spectral evidence,’ i.e., evidence from apparitions, or ‘specters,’ sent by a witch or the devil (as in the testimony against Susanna Martin above, paragraphs 5, 6, & 7).
[1] …[Is it] not possible for the devil to impose on the imaginations of persons bewitched and…cause them to believe that an innocent…person does torment them…? The answer to the question must be affirmative… The sacred story of Job giveth us to understand that the Lord…does for his wise and holy ends suffer Satan by immediate operation and [also] by witchcraft greatly to afflict innocent persons, as in their bodies and estates, so in their reputations… To take away the life [of] anyone merely because a specter or devil in a bewitched or possessed person does accuse them will bring the guilt of innocent blood on the land… No credit ought to be given to what demons in such as are by them obsessed shall say… The devil is pleased and honored when any of his institutions are made use of: this way of discovering witches is no better than that of putting the urine of the afflicted person into a bottle so that the witch may be tormented and discovered, the vanity and superstition of which practice I have…testified against…
[2] The scripture which says, “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live” [Exodus 22:18], clearly implies that some in the world may be known and proved to be witches… But then the inquiry is, what is sufficient proof? …A free and voluntary confession…is a sufficient ground of conviction… But as for the testimony of confessing witches against others, the case is not so clear… If two credible persons shall affirm upon oath that they have seen the party accused speaking such words, or doing things which none but such as have familiarity with the devil ever did or can do, that’s a sufficient ground for conviction… This notwithstanding, I will add: it were better that ten suspected witches should escape, than that one innocent person should be condemned…; that is an old saying, and true…
2. Cotton Mather, Wonders of the Invisible World, 1692: Proving Witchcraft
Cotton Mather tended to support the Salem prosecutions, even though he soon began to follow his father in striking a note of caution. In The Wonders of the Invisible World, he described the traditional and still widely accepted guidelines concerning the ‘presumptions’ and ‘proofs’ of witchcraft that legal and religious authorities expected judges to apply.
[Presumptions of Witchcraft]
[1] There are presumptions, which do at least probably and conjecturally note one to be a witch. These give occasion to examine, but they are no sufficient causes of conviction. If any man or woman be notoriously defamed for a witch, this yields a strong suspicion. Yet the judge ought carefully to look, that the report be made by men of honesty and credit. If a fellow-witch or magician give testimony of any person to be a witch, this…is not sufficient…, but it is a fit presumption… If after cursing there follow death, or at least some mischief…, this also is a sufficient matter of examination… If after enmity, quarrelling, or threatening, a present mischief does follow, this is also a great presumption…
[2] If the party suspected be the son or daughter, the man-servant or maid-servant, the familiar friend, near neighbor, or old companion of a known and convicted witch, this may be likewise a presumption, for witchcraft is an art that may be learned… Some add this for a presumption: if the party suspected be found to have the devil’s mark; for it is commonly thought, when the devil makes his covenant with them, he always leaves his mark behind them, whereby he knows them for his own; a mark whereof no evident reason in nature can be given. Lastly, if the party examined be inconstant, or contrary to himself, in his deliberate answers, it argueth for a guilty conscience… And yet there are causes of astonishment which may befall the good, as well as the bad.
[Proofs of Witchcraft]
[3] …Then there is…conviction…, which must proceed from just and sufficient proofs… Scratching of the suspected party… [and] the floating of the suspected party, thrown upon the water: these proofs are so far from being sufficient that some of them are, after a sort, practices of witchcraft.
[4] Among the sufficient means of conviction, the first is the free and voluntary confession of the crime made by the party suspected… A second sufficient conviction [is] the testimony of two witnesses of good and honest report, avouching before the magistrate upon their own knowledge [that] either the party accused has made a league with the devil, or has done some known practices of witchcraft… If it can be proved that the party hath entertained a familiar spirit and had conference with it, in the likeness of some visible creatures, here is evidence of witchcraft. If the witnesses affirm upon oath that the suspected person hath done any action or work which necessarily infers a covenant made, [such] as that he hath used enchantments, divined things before they come to pass…, raised tempests, [or] caused the form of a dead man to appear; it proves sufficiently that he or she is a witch.