The Witchcraft Delusion In Colonial Connecticut (1647-1697)
John M. Taylor

Part 3 out of 3

words she remembers not; and something Mr. Ludlow spake, as some did or
might ouer-heare what she said to him, or words to that effect, and that
she tumbled the dead body of Knapps wife vp & downe and spake words to
this purpose, that if these be the markes of a witch she was one, or had
such markes; and concerning any promise of secrecy she remembers not."

"Mr. Dauenport and Mris. Dauenport affirmed ypon oath, that the
testimonies before written, as they properly belong to each, is the
truth, according to their best knowledg & memory.

"Mr. Dauenport desired that in takeing his oath to be thus vnderstood,
that as he takes his oath to giue satisfaction to the court and Mr.
Ludlowes atturny, in the matters attested betwixt M' Ludlow & Thomas
Staplies, so he lymits his oath onely to that pt and not to ye preface
or conclusion, they being no pt of the attestation and so his oath not
required in them.

"To the latter pt of the declaration, the plant' pduced ye proofe

"Goodwif Sherwood of Fairfeild affirmeth vpon oath, that vpon some
debate betwixt Mr. Ludlow and goodwife Staplies, she heard M' Ludlow
charge goodwif Staplies wth a tract of lying, and that in discourse she
had heard him so charge her seuerall times.

"John Tompson of Fairfeild testifyeth vpon oath, that in discourse he
hath heard Mr. Ludlow express himselfe more then once that goodwife
Staplies went on in a tract of lying, and when goodwife Staplyes hath
desired Mr. Ludlow to convince her of telling one lye, he said she need
not say so, for she went on in a tract of lying.

"Goodwife Gould of Fairefeild testifyeth vpon oath, that in a debate in
ye church wth Mr. Ludlow, goodwife Staplyes desired him to show her
wherein she had told one lye, but Mr. Ludlow said she need not mention
ptculars, for she had gon on in a tract of lying.

"Ensigne Bryan was told, he sees how the plantife hath proued his
charge, to wch he might now answer; wherevpon he presented seuerall
testimonies in wrighting vpon oath, taken before Mr. Wells and Mr.

"May the thirteenth, 1654.

"Hester Ward, wife of Andrew Ward, being sworne deposeth, that aboute a
day after that goodwife Knapp was condemned for a witch, she goeing to
ye prison house where the said Knapp was kept, she, ye said Knapp,
voluntarily, wthout any occasion giuen her, said that goodwife Staplyes
told her, the said Knapp, that an Indian brought vnto her, the said
Staplyes, two litle things brighter then the light of the day, and told
the said goodwife Staplyes they were Indian gods, as the Indian called
ym; and the Indian wthall told her, the said Staplyes, if she would
keepe them, she would be so big rich, all one god, and that the said
Staplyes told the said Knapp, she gaue them again to the said Indian,
but she could not tell whether she did so or no.

"Luce Pell, the wife of Thomas Pell, being sworne deposeth as followeth,
that aboute a day after goodwife Knapp was condemned for a witch, Mris.
Jones earnestly intreated her to goe to ye said Knapp, who had sent for
her, and then this deponent called the said Hester Ward, and they went
together; then the said Knapp voluntarily, of her owne accord, spake as
the said Hester Ward hath testifyed, word by word; and the said Mris.
Pell further saith, that she being one of ye women that was required by
the court to search the said Knapp before she was condemned, & then
Mris. Jones presed her, the said Knapp, to confess whether ther were any
other that were witches, because goodwife goodwife Basset, when she was
condemned, said there was another witch in Fairefeild that held her head
full high, and then the said goodwife Knapp stepped a litle aside, and
told her, this deponent, goodwife Basset ment not her; she asked her
whom she ment, and she named goodwife Staplyes, and then vttered the
same speeches as formerly conerning ye Indian gods, and that goodwife
Staplyes her sister Martha told the said goodwife Knapp, that her sister
Staplyes stood by her, by the fire in there house, and she called to
her, sister, sister, and she would not answer, but she, the said Martha,
strucke at her and then she went away, and ye next day she asked her
sister, and she said she was not there; and Mris. Ward doth also testify
wth Mris. Pell, that the said Knapp said the same to her; and the said
Mris. Pell saith, that aboute two dayes after the search afforesaid, she
went to ye said Knapp in prison house, and the said Knapp said to her,
I told you a thing the other day, and goodman Staplies had bine wth her
and threatened her, that she had told some thing of his wife that would
bring his wiues name in question, and this deponent she told no body of
it but her husband, & she was much moued at it.

"Elizabeth Brewster being sworne, deposeth and saith, that after
goodwife Knap was executed, as soone as she was cut downe, she, the said
Knapp, being caried to the graue side, goodwife Staplyes wth some other
women went to search the said Knapp, concerning findeing out teats, and
goodwife Staplyes handled her verey much, and called to goodwife
Lockwood, and said, these were no witches teates, but such as she
herselfe had, and other women might haue the same, wringing her hands
and takeing ye Lords name in her mouth, and said, will you say these
were witches teates, they were not, and called vpon goodwife Lockwood to
come & see them; then this deponent desired goodwife Odell to come &
see, for she had bine vpon her oath when she found the teates, and she,
this depont, desired the said Odill to come and clere it to goodwife
Staplies; goodwife Odill would not come; then the said Staplies still
called vpon goodwife Lockwood to come, will you say these are witches
teates, I, sayes the said Staplies, haue such myselfe, and so haue you
if you search yorselfe; goodwife Lockwood replyed, if I had such, she
would be hanged; would you, sayes Staplies, yes, saith Lockwood, and
deserve it; and the said Staplies handeled the said teates very much,
and pulled them wth her fingers, and then goodwife Odill came neere, and
she, the said Staplies, still questioning, the said Odill told her no
honest woman had such, and then all the women rebuking her and said
they were witches teates, and the said Staplies yeilded it.

"Mary Brewster being sworn & deposed, saith as followeth, that she was
present after the execution of ye said Knapp, and she being brought to
the graue side, she saw goodwife Staplyes pull the teates that were
found aboute goodwife Knapp, and was verey earnest to know whether those
were witches teates wch were found aboute her, the said Knapp, wn the
women searched her, and the said Staplyes pulled them as though she
would haue pulled them of, and prsently she, ths depont, went away, as
hauing no desire to looke vpon them.

"Susan Lockwood, wife of Robert Lockwood, being sworne & examined saith
as foll, that she was at the execution of goodwife Knapp that was hanged
for a witch, and after the said Knapp was cut downe and brought to the
graue, goodwife Staplyes, wth other women, looked after the teates that
the women spake of appointed by the magistrats, and the said goodwife
Staplies was handling of her where the teates were, and the said
Staplies stood vp and called three or foure times and bid me come looke
of them, & asked her whether she would say they were teates, and she
made this answer, no matter whether there were teates or no, she had
teates and confessed she was a witch, that was sufficient; if these be
teates, here are no more teates then I myselfe haue, or any other women,
or you either if you would search yor body; this depont saith she said,
I know not what you haue, but for herselfe, if any finde any such things
aboute me, I deserved to be hanged as she was, and yet afterward she,
the said Staplyes, stooped downe againe and handled her, ye said Knapp,
verey much, about ye place where the teates were, and seuerall of ye
women cryed her downe, and said they were teates, and then she, the said
Staplyes, yeilded, & said verey like they might be teates.

"Thomas Sheruington & Christopher Combstocke & goodwife Baldwine were
all together at the prison house where goodwife Knapp was, and ye said
goodwife Baldwin asked her whether she, the said Knapp, knew of any
other, and she said there were some, or one, that had receiued Indian
gods that were very bright; the said Baldwin asked her how she could
tell, if she were not a witch herselfe, and she said the party told her
so, and her husband was witnes to it; and to this they were all sworne &
doe depose.

"Rebecka Hull, wife of Cornelius Hull, being sworne & examined, deposeth
& saith as followeth, that when goodwife Knapp was goeing to execution,
Mr. Ludlow, and her father Mr. Jones, pressing the said Knapp to confess
that she was a witch, vpon wch goodwife Staplies said, why should she,
the said Knapp, confess that wch she was not, and after she, the said
goodwife Staplyes, had said so, on that stood by, why should she say so,
she the said Staplyes replyed, she made no doubt if she the said Knapp
were one, she would confess it.

"Deborah Lockwood, of the age of 17 or thereaboute, sworne & examined,
saith as followeth, that she being present when goodwife Knapp was
goeing to execution, betweene Tryes & the mill, she heard goodwife
Staplyes say to goodwife Gould, she was pswaded goodwife Knapp was no
witch; goodwife Gould said, sister Staplyes, she is a witch, & hath
confessed had had familiarity wth the Deuill. Staplies replyed, I was
wth her yesterday, or last night, and she said no such thing as she

"Aprill 26th, 1654.

"Bethia Brundish, of the age of sixteene or thereaboutes, maketh oath,
as they were goeing to execution of goodwife Knapp, who was condemned
for a witch by the court & jury at Fairfeild, there being present
herselfe & Deborah Lockwood and Sarah Cable, she heard goodwife Staplyes
say, that she thought the said goodwife Knapp was no witch, and goodwife
Gould presently reproued her for it." "Witnes

"Andrew Warde,

"Jurat' die & anno prdicto,

"Coram me, Ro Ludlowe.

"The plant' replyed that he had seuerall other witnesses wch he thought
would cleere the matters in question, if the court please to heare them,
wch being granted, he first presented a testimony of goodwife Whitlocke
of Fairfeild, vpon oath taken before Mr. Fowler at Millford, the 27th of
May, 1654, wherein she saith, that concerning goodwife Staplyes speeches
at the execution of goodwife Knapp, she being present & next to goody
Staplyes when they were goeing to put the dead corpes of goodwife Knapp
into the graue, seuerall women were looking for the markes of a witch
vpon the dead body, and seuerall of the women said they could finde
none, & this depont said, nor I; and she heard goodwife Staplyes say,
nor I; then came one that had searched the said witch, & shewed them the
markes that were vpon her, and said what are these; and then this depont
heard goodwife Staplyes say she never saw such in all her life, and that
she was pswaded that no honest woman had such things as those were; and
the dead corps being then prsently put into the graue, goodwife Staplyes
& myselfe came imediately away together vnto the towne, from the place
of execution.

"Goodwife Barlow of Fairfeild before the court did now testify vpon
oath, that when Knapps wife was hanged and ready to be buried, she
desired to see the markes of a witch and spake to one of her neighbours
to goe wth her, and they looked but found them not; then goodwife
Staplyes came to them, and one or two more, goodwife Stapyleyes kneeled
downe by them, and they all looked but found ym not, & said they saw
nothing but what is comon to other women, but after they found them they
all wondered, and goodwife Staplyes in pticular, and said they neuer saw
such things in their life before, so they went away.

"The wife of John Tompson of Fairefeild testifyeth vpon oath, that
goodwife Whitlock, goodwife Staplyes and herselfe, were at the graue and
desired to see ye markes of the witch that was hanged, they looked but
found them not at first, then the midwife came & shewed them, goodwife
Staplyes said she neuer saw such, and she beleeved no honest woman had

"Goodwife Sherwood of Fairefeild testifyeth vpon oath, that that day
Knapps wife was condemned for a witch, she was there to see her, all
being gone forth but goodwife Odill and her selfe, then their came in
Mris. Pell and her two daughters, Elizabeth & Mary, goody Lockwood and
goodwife Purdy; Mris. Pell told Knapps wife she was sent to speake to
her, to haue her confess that for wch she was condemned, and if she knew
any other to be a witch to discover them, and told her, before she was
condemned she might thinke it would be a meanes to take away her life,
but now she must dye, and therefore she should discouer all, for though
she and her family by the providence of God had brought in nothing
against her, yet ther was many witnesses came in against her, and she
was cast by the jury & godly magistrats hauing found her guilty, and
that the last evidence cast the cause. So the next day she went in
againe to see the witch wth other neighbours, there was Mr. Jones, Mris.
Pell & her two daughters, Mris. Ward and goodwife Lockwood, where she
heard Mris. Pell desire Knapps wife to lay open herselfe, and make way
for the minister to doe her good; her daughter Elizabeth bid her doe as
the witch at the other towne did, that is, discouer all she knew to be
witches. Goodwife Knapp said she must not say anything wch is not true,
she must not wrong any body, and what had bine said to her in private,
before she went out of the world, when she was vpon the ladder, she
would reveale to Mr. Ludlow or ye minister. Elizabeth Bruster said, if
you keepe it a litle longer till you come to the ladder, the diuill will
haue you quick, if you reveale it not till then. Good: Knapp replyed,
take heed the devile haue not you, for she could not tell how soone she
might be her companyon, and added, the truth is you would haue me say
that goodwife Staplyes is a witch, but I haue sinns enough to answer for
allready, and I hope I shall not add to my condemnation; I know nothing
by goodwife Staplyes, and I hope she is an honest woman. Then goodwife
Lockwood said, goodwife Knapp what ayle you; goodman Lyon, I pray
speake, did you heare vs name goodwif Staplyes name since we came here;
Lyon wished her to haue a care what she said and not breed difference
betwixt neighbours after she was gone; Knapp replyed, goodman Lyon hold
yor tongue, you know not what I know, I haue ground for what I say, I
haue bine fished wthall in private more then you are aware of; I
apprehend goodwife Staples hath done me some wrong in her testimony, but
I must not render euill for euill. Then this depont spake to goody
Knapp, wishing her to speake wth the jury, for she apprehended goodwife
Staplyes witnessed nothing contrary to other witnesses, and she supposed
they would informe her that the last evidence did not cast ye cause; she
replyed that she had bine told so wthin this halfe houre, & desired Mr.
Jones and herselfe to stay and the rest to depart, that she might speake
wth vs in private, and desired me to declare to Mr. Jones what they said
against goodwife Staplyes the day before, but she told her she heard not
goodwife Staplyes named, but she knew nothing of that nature; she
desired her to declare her minde fully to M' Jones, so she went away.

"Further this depont saith, that comeing into the house where the witch
was kept, she found onely the wardsman and goodwife Baldwine, there
goodwife Baldwin whispered her in the eare and said to her that goodwife
Knapp told her that a woman in ye towne was a witch and would be hanged
wthin a twelue moneth, and would confess herselfe a witch and cleere her
that she was none, and that she asked her how she knew she was a witch,
and she told her she had reeived Indian gods of an Indian, wch are
shining things, wch shine lighter then the day. Then this depont asked
goodwife Knapp if she had said so, and she denyed it; goodwife Baldwin
affirmed she did, but Knapps wife againe denyed it and said she knowes
no woman in the towne that is a witch, nor any woman that hath received
Indian gods, but she said there was an Indian at a womans house and
offerred her a coople of shining things, but she woman neuer told her
she tooke them, but was afraide and ran away, and she knowes not that
the woman euer tooke them. Goodwife desired this depont to goe out and
speake wth the wardsmen; Thomas Shervington, who was one of them, said
hee remembred not that Knapps wife said a woman in the towne was a witch
and would be hanged, but spake something of shining things, but Kester,
Mr. Pells man, being by said, but I remember; and as they were goeing to
the graue, goodwife Staplyes said, it was long before she could beleeve
this poore woman was a witch, or that their were any witches, till the
word of God convinced her, wch saith, thou shalt not suffer a witch to

"Thomas Lyon of Fairfeild testifyeth vpon oath, taken before Mr. Fowler,
the 27th May, 1654, that he being set by authority to watch wth Knapps
wife, there came in Mris. Pell, Mrs. Ward, goodwife Lockwood, and Mris.
Pells two daughters; the fell into some discourse, that goodwife Knapp
should say to them in private wch goodwife Knapp would not owne, but did
seeme to be much troubled at them and said, the truth is you would haue
me to say that goodwife Staplyes is a witch; I haue sinnes enough
allready, I will not add this to my condemnation, I know no such thing
by her, I hope she is an honest woman; then goodwife Lockwood caled to
mee and asked whether they had named goodwife Staplyes, so I spake to
goodwife Knapp to haue a care what she said, that she did not make
differrence amongst her neighbours when she was gon, and I told her that
I hoped they were her frends and desired her soules good, and not to
accuse any out of envy, or to that effect; Knapps wife said, goodman
Lyon hold yor tongue, you know not so much as I doe, you know not what
hath bine said to me in private; and after they was gon, of her owne
accord, betweene she & I, goody Knapp said she knew nothing against
goodwife Staplyes of being a witch.

"Goodwife Gould of Fairfeild testifyeth vpon oath, that goodwife
Sherwood & herselfe came in to see the witch, there was one before had
bine speaking aboute some suspicious words of one in the towne, this
depont wished her if she knew anything vpon good ground she would
declare it, if not, that she would take heede that the deuill pswaded
her not to sow malicious seed to doe hurt when she was dead, yet wished
her to speake the truth if she knew anything by any pson; she said she
knew nothing but vpon suspicion by the rumours she heares; this depont
told her she was now to dye, and therefore she should deale truly; she
burst forth ito weeping and desired me to pray for her, and said I knew
not how she was tempted; neuer, neuer poore creature was tempted as I am
tempted, pray, pray for me. Further this depont saith, as they were
goeing to ye graue, Mr. Buckly, goodwife Sherwood, goodwife Staplye and
myselfe, goodwife Staplyes was next me, she said it was a good while
before she could beleeue this woman was a witch, and that she could not
beleue a good while that there were any witches, till she went to ye
word of God, and then she was convinced, and as she remembers, goodwife
Stapleyes went along wth her all the way till they came at ye gallowes.
Further this deponent saith, that Mr. Jones some time since that Knapps
wife was condemned, did tell her, and that wth a very cherefull
countenance & blessing God for it, that Knapps wife had cleered one in
ye towne, & said you know who I meane sister Staplyes, blessed be God
for it."

Staplies' wife was a character. She was "a light woman" from the night
of her memorable ride with Tom Tash, to Jemeaco, Long Island, to the
suspicion of herself as a witch, and the "repairing" of her name by
Thomas' lawsuit, and her own indictment for familiarity with Satan some
years later. That she had many of the traditional witch qualities, and
was something of a gymnast and hypnotist, is written in the vivid
recollections of Tash's experience with her. This was his account of it
on oath thirty years after:

"John Tash aged about sixty four or thareabouts saith he being at Master
Laueridges at Newtown on Long Island aboutt thirty year since Goodman
Owen and Goody Owin desired me to goe with Thomas Stapels wiffe of
Fairfield to Jemeaco on Long Island to the hous of George Woolsy and as
we war going along we cam to a durty slow and thar the hors blundred in
the slow and I mistrusted that she the said Goody Stapels was off the
hors and I was troubiled in my mind very much soe as I cam back I
thought I would tak better noatis how it was and when I cam to the slow
abovesaid I put on the hors prity sharp and then I put my hand behind me
and felt for her and she was not upon the hors and as soon as we war out
of the slow she was on the hors behind me boath going and coming and
when I cam home I told thes words to Master Leveredg that she was a
light woman as I judged and I am redy to give oath to this when leagaly
caled tharunto as witnes my hand.

his "John+Tash mark

"Grenwich July 12, 1692.

"John Tash hath given oath to his testimony abovesaid

"Before me John Renels Comessener."

And Mistress Staplies had other qualities, always potent in small
communities to invite criticism and dislike. She was a shrewd and
shrewish woman, impatient of some of the Puritan social standards and of
the laws of everyday life. She openly condemned certain common
moralities, was reckless in criticism of her neighbors, and quarreled
with Ludlow about some church matters.

It is evident from the testimonies that Staplies was on both sides as to
the guilt of goodwife Knapp, and when rumor and suspicion began to point
to herself as a mischief-maker and busybody in witchcraft matters, to
divert attention from his wife and set a backfire to the sweep of public
opinion, Thomas sued Ludlow, and despite his strong and clear defense as
shown on the record evidence, the court in his absence awarded damages
against him for defamation and for charging Staplies' wife with going on
"in a tract of lying," "in reparation of his wife's name" as the
judgment reads. Mistress Staplies did not grow in grace, or in the
graces of her neighbors, since some years later she was indicted for
witchcraft, tried, and acquitted with others, at Fairfield, in 1692.[J]

[Footnote J: See _Historical Note_, p. 161.]


"The planters of New England were Englishmen, not exempt from
English prejudices in favor of English institutions, laws and usages ...
They had not been taught to question the wisdom or the humanity of
English criminal law. They were as unconscious of its barbarism, as
were the parliaments which had enacted or the courts which dispensed
it." _Blue Laws, True and False_ (p. 15), J. HAMMOND TRUMBULL.

"It would seem a marvellous panic, this that shook the rugged
reasoners in its iron grasp, and led to such insanity as this
displayed toward Alse Young, did we not know that it was but the
result of a normal inhuman law confirmed by a belief in the divine,
the direct legacy of England, the unquestionable utterance of Church
and State." _One Blank of Windsor_, ANNIE ELIOT TRUMBULL.

This brief review of witchcraft in some of its historical aspects, of
its spread to the New England colonies, of its rise and suppression in
the Connecticut towns, with the citations from the original records
which admit no challenge of the facts, may be aptly closed by what is
believed to be a complete list of the Connecticut witchcraft cases,
authenticated by conclusive evidence of time, place, incident, and

Some minor questions may be put, or kept in controversy, as one writer
or another, who regards history as a matter of opinion, not of fact, and
relying on tradition or hearsay evidence or on superficial
investigation, gives a place to guesswork instead of truth, to
historical conceits instead of historical verities.


Herein are written the names of all persons in anywise involved in the
witchcraft delusion in Connecticut, with the consequences to them in
indictments, trials, convictions, executions, or in banishment, exile,
warnings, reprieves, or acquittals, so far as made known in any
tradition, document, public or private record, to this time.

MARY JOHNSON. Windsor, 1647.

There is no documentary or other evidence to show that Mary Johnson was
executed for witchcraft in Windsor in 1647. The charge rests on an entry
in Governor Winthrop's _Journal_, "One ---- of Windsor arraigned and
executed at Hartford for a witch." WINTHROP'S _History of New England_
(Savage, 2: 374).

No importance would have attached to this statement, which bears no date
and does not give the name or sex of the condemned, had not Dr. Savage
in his annotations of the _Journal_ (2: 374) asserted that it was "the
first instance of the delusion in New England," and without warrant
added, "Perhaps there was sense enough early in the colony to destroy
the record."

In all discussions of this matter, it has been assumed or conceded (in
the absence of any positive proof), by such eminent critics and scholars
as Drake, Fiske, Poole, Hoadley, Stiles, and others, that Winthrop's
note was based on rumor or hearsay, or that it related to the later
conviction and execution of a woman of the same name, next noted, and
the errors as to person, time, and place might easily have been made.

MARY JOHNSON. Wethersfield, 1648.

This Mary Johnson left a definite record. It is written in broad lines
in the dry-as-dust chronicles of the time. Cotton Mather embalmed the
tragedy in his _Magnalia_.

"There was one Mary Johnson tryd at Hartford in this countrey, upon an
indictment of 'familiarity with the devil,' and was found guilty
thereof, chiefly upon her own confession."

"And she dyd in a frame extreamly to the satisfaction of them that were
spectators of it." _Magnalia Christi Americana_ (6: 7).

At a session of the Particular Court held in Hartford, August 21, 1646,
Mary Johnson for thievery was sentenced to be presently whipped, and to
be brought forth a month hence at Wethersfield, and there whipped. The
whipping post, even in those days, did not prove a means to repentance
and reformation, since at a session of the same court, December 7, 1648,
the jury found a bill of indictment against Mary Johnson, that by her
own confession she was guilty of familiarity with the devil.

That she was condemned and executed seems certain (it being assumed that
Mary and Elizabeth Johnson were one and the same person, both Christian
names appearing in the record), since at a session of the General Court,
May 21, 1650, the prison-keeper's charges for her imprisonment were
allowed and ordered paid "out of her estate."

A pathetic incident attaches to this case. A child to this poor woman
was "borne in the prison," who was bound out until he became twenty-one
years of age, to Nathaniel Rescew, to whom L15 were paid according to
the mother's promise to him, he having engaged himself "to meinteine and
well educate her sonne." _Colonial Records of Connecticut_
(I,143: 171: 209-22-26-32).


_A secret long kept made known--Winthrop's journal entry probably
correct--Tradition and surmise make place for historical certainty--The
evidence of an eyewitness--A notable service._

ALSE YOUNG. Windsor, 1647.

"May 26. 47 Alse Young was hanged." MATTHEW GRANT'S _Diary_.

"The first entry (the executions of Carrington and his wife being next
mentioned) supplies the name of the 'One (blank) of Windsor arraigned
and executed at Hartford for a witch'--the first known execution for
witchcraft in New England. I have found no mention elsewhere of this
Alse Young." J. HAMMOND TRUMBULL'S _Observation on Grant's Entry_.

"Who then was the 'witch' with whose execution Connecticut stepped into
the dark shadow of persecution? She has been called Mary Johnson, but no
Mary Johnson has been identified as this earliest victim. Whose is that
pathetic figure shrinking in the twilight of that early record? We could
think of her with no less kindly compassion could we give a name to the
unhappy victim of the misread Word of God, who was led forth to a death
stripped of dignity as of consolation: who to an ignorance and
credulity, brought from an old world and not yet sifted out by the
enlightenment and experience of a new, yielded up her perhaps miserable
but unforfeited life. Here is the note which in all probability
establishes the identity of the One of Windsor arraigned and executed as
a witch--'May 26, 47 Alse Young was hanged.'" _"One Blank" of Windsor_
(Courant Literary Section, 12, 3, 1904), ANNIE ELIOT TRUMBULL.

Matthew Grant came over with the Dorchester men from the Bay Colony in
1635, and settled in Windsor, Connecticut, where he lived until his
death there in 1683.

He was a land surveyor, and the town clerk, a close observer of men and
their public and private affairs, and kept a careful record of current
events in a "crabbed, eccentric but by no means entirely illegible hand"
during the long years of his sojourn in the "Lord's Waste."

It has been surmised for several years--but without confirmation--and
credited by the highest authorities in Connecticut colonial history, and
known only to one of them, that Grant's manuscript diary contained the
significant historical note as to the fate of Alse Young. It waited two
centuries and more for its true interpreter, as did Wolcott's cipher
notes of Hooker's famous sermon, and there it is, "not made on the
decorous pages which memorize the saints," Brookes, Hooker, Warham,
Reyner, Hanford, and Huit, "but scrawled on the inside of the cover,
where it might be the sinner might escape detection."

In the publication of Grant's note Miss Trumbull has rendered a great
service in the settlement of a disputed question, in the correction of
errors, in fixing the priority of the outbreak between Massachusetts and
Connecticut; and in the new light shining through this revelation stands
Alse, glorified with the qualities of youth, of gentleness, of
innocence; and the story of her going to the unholy sacrifice on that
fateful May morning more than two and a half centuries ago is told with
exquisite tenderness and pathos.

Confirmation of the truth of Grant's entry is given by the scholarly
historian of Windsor, Dr. Stiles, who says in his history of that
ancient town:

"We know that a John Youngs, [?] bought land in Windsor of William
Hubbard in 1641--which he sold in 1649--and thereafter disappears from
record. He may have been the husband or father of 'Achsah'[?] the witch;
if so, it would be most natural that he and his family should leave
Windsor." STILES' _History of Windsor_ (pp. 444-450).

JOHN and JOAN CARRINGTON. Wethersfield, 1651.

They were indicted at a court held February 20, 1651, Governor John
Haynes and Edward Hopkins being present, with other magistrates; and
they were found guilty on March 6, 1651. Both were executed. _Records
Particular Court_ (2: 17). [Dr. Hoadley's note in this case: "Mr.
Trumbull (Dr. J. Hammond Trumbull) told me he had a record of execution
in these cases. I suppose he referred to the diary of Matthew Grant."]
The entry of the execution appears in Grant's _Diary_, after the note as
to Alse Young. _One Blank of Windsor_, TRUMBULL.

LYDIA GILBERT. Windsor, 1654.

October 3, 1651, Henry Stiles of Windsor was killed by the accidental
discharge of a gun in the hands of Thomas Allyn, also of Windsor. An
inquest was held, and Thomas was indicted in the following December. He
plead guilty, and at the trial the jury found the fact to be "homicide
by misadventure." Thomas was fined L20 for his "sinful neglect and
careless carriage," and put under a bond of L10, for good behavior for a
year. _Records Particular Court_ (2: 29-57).

But witchcraft was abroad, and its tools and emissaries more than two
years afterwards fastened suspicion of this death by clear accident, on
Lydia Gilbert, it being charged that "thou hast of late years, or still
dost give entertainment to Sathan ... and by his helpe hast killed the
body of Henry Styles, besides other witchcrafts."

She was indicted and tried in September or November, 1654, and "Ye party
above mentioned is found guilty of witchcraft by ye jury." Her fate is
not written in any known record, but the late Honorable S.O. Griswold, a
recognized authority on early colonial history in Windsor, says that as
the result of a close examination of the record, "I think the reasonable
probability is that she was hanged." _Records Particular Court_ (2: 51);
STILE'S _History of Windsor_ (pp. 169, 444-450).

GOODY BASSETT. Stratford, 1651. Executed.

"The Gouernor, Mr. Cullick, and Mr. Clarke are desired to goe downe to
Stratford to keepe courte uppon the tryall of Goody Bassett for her
life"--May, 1651. "Because goodwife Bassett when she was condemned"
(probably on her own confession, as in the Greensmith case). _Colonial
Records of Connecticut_ (1: 220); _New Haven Colonial Records_ (2: 77-88).

GOODWIFE KNAPP. Fairfield, 1653. Executed.

"After goodwife Knapp was executed, as soon as she was cut downe." _New
Haven Colonial Records_ (1: 81).

Full account in previous chapter.

ELIZABETH GODMAN. New Haven, 1655. Acquitted.

Elizabeth was released from prison September 4, 1655, with a reprimand
and warning by the court. _New Haven Town Records_ (2: 174, 179); _New
Haven Colonial Records_ (2: 29, 151).

Account in previous chapter.

NICHOLAS BAYLEY and WIFE. New Haven, 1655. Acquitted.

Nicholas and his wife, after several appearances in court on account of
a suspicion of witchcraft, and for various other offenses--among them,
lying and filthy speeches by the wife--were advised to remove from the
colony. They took the advice.

WILLIAM MEAKER. New Haven, 1657. Accused acquitted.

Thomas Mullener was always in trouble. He was a chronic litigant. His
many contentions are noted at length in the court records. Among other
things he made up his mind that his pigs were bewitched, so "he did cut
of the tayle and eare of one and threw into the fire," "said it was a
meanes used in England by some people to finde out witches," and in the
light of this porcine sacrifice he charged his neighbor William Meaker
with the bewitching. Meaker promptly brought an action of defamation,
but Mullener became involved in other controversies and "miscarriages,"
to the degree that he was advised to remove out of the place, and put
under bonds for good behavior; and Meaker, probably feeling himself
vindicated, dropped his suit. _New Haven Colonial Records_ (2: 224).

ELIZABETH GARLICK. Easthampton, 1658. Acquitted.

_Records Particular Court_ (2 :113); _Colonial Records of Connecticut_
(1: 573); STILES' _History of Windsor_ (p. 735).

Account in previous chapter.


Jury disagreed.

The major part of the jury found Nicholas guilty, but the rest only
strongly suspected him, and as to Margaret, some found her guilty, and
the others suspected her to be guilty. It is probable that the Jennings
were under inquiry when, at a session of the General Court at Hartford,
June 15, 1659, it was recorded that "Mr. Willis is requested to goe
downe to Sea Brook, to assist ye Maior in examininge the suspitions
about witchery, and to act therin as may be requisite." _Records
Particular Court_ (2: 160-3); _Colonial Records of Connecticut_ (1: 338).

1662-63 was a notable year in the history of witchcraft in Connecticut.
It marked the last execution for the crime within the commonwealth, and
thirty years before the outbreak at Salem.


Account in previous chapter. _Records Particular Court_ (2: 182);
_Memorial History Hartford County_ (1: 274); _Connecticut Magazine_
(November 1899, pp. 557-561).

MARY SANFORD. Hartford, 1662. Convicted June 13, 1662. Executed.

_Records Particular Court_ (2: 174-175); HOADLEY'S _Record Witchcraft

ANDREW SANFORD. Hartford, 1662. No indictment.

_Records Particular Court_ (2: 174-175); HOADLEY'S _Record Witchcraft

JUDITH VARLETT (VARLETH). Hartford, 1662. Arrested; released.

It will be recalled that Rebecca Greensmith in her confession, among
other things, said that Mrs. Judith Varlett told her that she (Varlett)
"was much troubled wth ye Marshall Jonath: Gilbert & cried, & she sayd
if it lay in her power she would doe him a mischief, or what hurt shee

Judith must have indulged in other indiscretions of association or of
speech, since she soon fell under suspicion of witchcraft, and was put
under arrest and imprisoned. But she had a powerful friend at court
(who, despite his many contentions and intrigues, commanded the
attention of the Connecticut authorities), in the person of her
brother-in-law Peter Stuyvesant, then bearing the title and office of
"Captain General and Commander-in-Chief of Amsterdam In New Netherland,
now called New York, and the Dutch West India Islands." It was doubtless
due to his intercession in a letter of October 13, 1662, that she was

The letter:

"To the Honorable Deputy Governour & Court of "Magistracy att Harafort.
(Oct. 1662)

"Honoured and Worthy Srs.--

"By this occasion of me Brother in Lawe (beinge necessitated to make a
Second Voyage for ayde his distressed sister Judith Varleth jmprisoned
as we are jmformed, uppon pretend accusation of wicherye we Realy
Beleeve and out her wel known education Life Conversation & profession
of faith, wee dear assure that shee is jnnocent of Such a horrible
Crimen, & wherefor j doubt not hee will now, as formerly finde jour
dhonnours favour and ayde for the jnnocent). _Ye Ld Stephesons Letter_
(C.B. 2: doc. 1).

MARY BARNES. Farmington, 1662. Convicted January 6. Probably executed.
_Records Particular Court_ (2: 184).

WILLIAM AYRES and GOODY AYRES his Wife. Hartford, 1662. Arrested. Fled
from the colony.

ELIZABETH SEAGER. Hartford, 1662. Convicted; discharged.

Goody Seager probably deserved all that came to her in trials and
punishment. She was one of the typical characters in the early
communities upon whom distrust and dislike and suspicion inevitably
fell. Exercising witch powers was one of her more reputable qualities.
She was indicted for blasphemy, adultery, and witchcraft at various
times, was convicted of adultery, and found guilty of witchcraft in
June, 1665. She owed her escape from hanging to a finding of the Court
of Assistants that the jury's verdict did not legally answer to the
indictment, and she was set "free from further suffering or
imprisonment." _Records County Court_ (3: 5: 52); _Colonial Records of
Connecticut_ (2: 531); _Rhode Island Colonial Records_ (2: 388).

JAMES WALKLEY. Hartford, 1662. Arrested. Fled to Rhode Island.

KATHERINE HARRISON. Wethersfield, 1669. Convicted; discharged.

See account in previous chapter. _Records Court of, Assistants_ (I,
1-7); _Colonial Records of Connecticut_ (2: 118, 132); _Doc. History New
York_ (4th ed., 4: 87).

NICHOLAS DESBOROUGH. Hartford, 1683. Suspicioned.

Desborough was a landowner in Hartford, having received a grant of fifty
acres for his services in the Pequot war. He owes his enrollment in the
hall of fame to Cotton Mather, who was so self-satisfied with his
efforts in "Relating the wonders of the invisible world in preternatural
occurrences" that in his pedantic exuberance he put in a learned
sub-title: "Miranda cano, sed sunt credenda" (The themes I sing are
marvelous, yet true).

Fourteen examples were chosen for the "Thaumatographia Pneumatica," as
"remarkable histories" of molestations from evil spirits, and Mather
said of them, "that no reasonable man in this whole country ever did
question them."

Desborough stands in place as the "fourth example." No case more clearly
illustrates the credulity that neutralized common sense in strong men.
It was a case of abstraction, or theft, or mistaken thrift. A "chest of
cloaths" was missing. The owner, instead of going to law, found his
remedy "in things beyond the course of nature," and he and his friends
with "nimble hands" pelted Desborough's house, and himself when abroad,
with stones, turves, and corncobs, and finally some of his property was
burned by a fire "in an unknown way kindled." Is it not enough to note
that Mather closes this wondrous tale of the spiritual molestations with
the very human explanation that "upon the restoring of the cloaths, the
trouble ceased"?

ELIZABETH CLAWSON. Fairfield, 1692. Acquitted.
Account in previous chapter.

MARY and HANNAH HARVEY. Fairfield, 1692. Jury found no bill.

GOODY MILLER. Fairfield, 1692. Acquitted.

MARY STAPLIES. Fairfield, 1692. Jury found no bill.
Account in previous chapter.

MERCY DISBOROUGH. Fairfield, 1692. Convicted; reprieved. Account in
previous chapter. HUGH CROTIA. Stratford, 1693. Jury found no bill.
Account in previous chapter. _C. & D._ (Vol. I,185).

WINIFRED BENHAM SENIOR and JUNIOR. Wallingford, 1697. Acquitted.

They were mother and daughter (twelve or thirteen years old), tried at
Hartford and acquitted in August, 1697; indicted on new complaints in
October, 1697, but the jury returned on the bill, "Ignoramus." _Records
Court of Assistants_ (1: 74, 77).

SARAH SPENCER. Colchester, 1724. Accused. Damages 1s.

Even a certificate of the minister as to her religion and virtue, could
not free Sarah from a reputation as a witch. And when Elizabeth (and how
many Connecticut witches bore that name) Ackley accused her of "riding
and pinching," and James Ackley, her husband, made threats, Sarah sued
them for a fortune in those days, L500 damages, and got judgment for L5,
with costs. The Ackleys appealed, and at the trial the jury awarded
Sarah damages of ls., and also stated that they found the Ackleys not
insane--a clear demonstration that the mental condition of witchcraft
accusers was taken account of in the later and saner times.

NORTON. Bristol, 1768. Suspicioned. No record.

"On the mountain," probably Fall mountain in Bristol, the antics of a
young woman named Norton, who accused her aunt of putting a bridle on
her and driving her through the air to witch meetings in Albany, caused
a commotion among the virtuous people. Deacon Dutton's ox was torn
apart by an invisible agent, and unseen hands brought new ailments to
the residents there, pinched them and stuck red hot pins into them.
Elder Wildman set out to exorcise the evil spirit, but became so
terrorized that he called for help, and one of his posse of assistants
was scared into convulsions. This case may be counted among the last,
perhaps the last traditions of the strange delusion which aforetime
filled the hills and valleys of Quohnectacut with its baleful light.
_Memorial History Hartford County_ (2: 51).


---- NORTON 1768

What of those men and women to whom justice in their time was meted out,
in this age of reason, of religious enlightenment, liberty, and
catholicity, when witchcraft has lost its mystery and power, when
intelligence reigns, and the Devil works his will in other devious ways
and in a more attractive guise?

They were the victims of delusion, not of dishonor, of a perverted
theology fed by moral aberrations, of a fanaticism which never stopped
to reason, and halted at no sacrifice to do God's service; and they were
all done to death, or harried into exile, disgrace, or social
ostracism, through a mistaken sense of religious duty: but they stand
innocent of deep offense and only guilty in the eye of the law written
in the Word of God, as interpreted and enforced by the forefathers who
wrought their condemnation, and whose religion made witchcraft a heinous
sin, and whose law made it a heinous crime.

Is the contrast in human experience, between the servitude to credulity
and superstition in 1647-97 and the deliverance from it of this day, any
wider than between the ironclad theology of that and of later times, and
the challenge to it, and its diabolical logic, of yesterday, which marks
a new era in denominational creeds, in religious beliefs, and their

Jonathan Edwards, in his famous sermon at Enfield in 1741, on "Sinners
in the hands of an Angry God," was inspired to say to the impenitent:
"The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider
or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you and is dreadfully
provoked; His wrath toward you burns like fire; He looks upon you as
worthy of nothing else but to be cast into the fire; He is of purer eyes
than to bear to have you in His sight; you are 10,000 times so
abominable in His eyes as the most hateful and venomous serpent is in
ours.... Instead of one how many is it likely will remember this
discourse in hell! And it would be a wonder if some that are now present
should not be in hell in a very short time--before this year is out. And
it would be no wonder if some persons, that now sit here in some seats
of this meeting-house, in health and quiet, and secure, should be there
before to-morrow morning." One hundred and sixty-three years later,
Rev. Dr. Samuel T. Carter, a godly minister of the same faith, "a
heretic who is no heretic," stood before the presbytery of Nassau, was
invited to remain in the Presbyterian communion, and yet said this of
the doctrine of Edwards, as written in the _Westminster Confession_: "In
God's name and Christ's name it is not true. There is no such God as the
God of the confession. There is no such world as the world of the
confession. There is no such eternity as the eternity of the
confession.... This world so full of flowers and sunshine and the
laughter of children is not a cursed lost world, and the 'endless
torment' of the confession is not God's, nor Christ's, nor the Bible's
idea of future punishment."

What should constitute the true faith of a Christian, and set him apart
from his fellowmen in duties and observances, was one of the crucial
questions in the everyday life of the early New England colonists, and
the hanging and discipline of witches was one of its necessary

It was the same spirit of intolerance and of religious animosity that
was written in the treatment of the Quakers and Baptists at Boston; in
the experience of Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson; and of "The
Rogerenes" in Connecticut, for "profanation of the Sabbath," told in a
chapter of forgotten history.

In the sunlight of the later revelation, is not the present judgment of
the men and women of those far off times, "when the wheel of prayer was
in perpetual motion," when fear and superstition and the wrath of an
angry God ruled the strongest minds, truly interpreted in the solemn
afterthoughts which the poet ascribes to the magistrate and minister at
the grave of Giles Corey?


"This is the Potter's Field. Behold the fate
Of those who deal in witchcrafts, and when questioned,
Refuse to plead their guilt or innocence,
And stubbornly drag death upon themselves.


"Those who lie buried in the Potter's Field
Will rise again as surely as ourselves
That sleep in honored graves with epitaphs;
And this poor man whom we have made a victim,
Hereafter will be counted as a martyr."

_The New England Tragedies._



The Connecticut historians to a very recent date, in ignorance of the
facts, and despite his notable services of twenty-four years to the
colonies, left Ludlow to die in obscurity in Virginia or elsewhere, and
some of the traditions, based on no record or other evidence, have been
recently repeated. It is therefore proper to state here in few words who
Ludlow was, what he did both in Massachusetts and Connecticut, and after
his "return into England" in 1654.

Ludlow came of an ancient English family, which gave to history in his
own time and generation such illustrious kinsmen as Sir Henry Ludlow, a
member of the Long Parliament and one of the Puritan leaders, and Sir
Edmund Ludlow, member of Parliament, Lieutenant-General under Cromwell,
member of the court at King Charles' trial, and whom Macaulay named "the
most illustrious saviour of a mighty race of men, the judges of a king,
the founders of a republic."

In May, 1630, Ludlow came to Massachusetts, as one of the Assistants
under the charter of "The Governor and company of Massachusetts Bay in
New England."

His services in the Bay Colony from 1630-35 ranged from the duties of a
magistrate in the Great Charter Court to those of the high office of
Deputy Governor. The quality of that service is written in a bare
statement of his various offices--surveyor, negotiator of the Pequot
treaty, colonel ex officio, auditor of Governor Winthrop's accounts,
superintendent of fortifications, military commissioner, member of the
General Court, Deputy Governor when Thomas Dudley was Governor; and he
was always one of the foremost men in civil, political, and social
affairs, to the day of his departure to "the valley of the long
river,"--a day of good fortune for Connecticut.

When Massachusetts established church membership as the condition of
suffrage,--and radical differences of opinion on other matters
arose,--it marked the culmination of a set purpose of some of her ablest
men to remove from her jurisdiction, among whom Hooker, Ludlow, and
Haynes were the most notable. The General Court created a commission to
govern Connecticut for a year, and made Ludlow its chief. He came to the
new land of promise with the Dorchester men, and settled in Windsor in

What he did in the nineteen years of his residence at Windsor and
Fairfield is epitomized in a brief summary of the duties and honors to
which he was called by his fellowmen:

Chief of the Massachusetts commission and the first Governor, de facto;
organizer and chief magistrate of the first court; writer of the
earliest laws; president of the court which declared war against the
Pequots; framer of the Fundamental Orders--the Constitution of
1639--which embodied the great principles of government by the people
propounded and elucidated by the illustrious Thomas Hooker, in his
letter to Governor Winthrop, and in his famous sermon; compiler, at the
request of the General Court, of the _Body of Lawes_, the _Code of
1650_; commissioner on important state matters; commissioner for the
United Colonies; founder and defender of Fairfield; patriot, jurist,

Ludlow left Connecticut in 1654, not to die in obscurity as the earlier
writers imagined, but to serve abroad for several years in positions of
honor and distinction.

Cromwell invited him to return, as he did many of the leading Puritans
in New England, and appointed him a commissioner for the administration
of justice in Dublin; also to serve with the chief justice of the upper
bench and other distinguished lawyers, to determine all the claims to
the forfeited Irish lands, and at last as a Master in Chancery.

Ten years Ludlow served in these important stations; and at his death,
probably in 1664, he was buried in St. Michael's churchyard in Dublin,
with his wife--a sister of Governor John Endicott--and other members of
his family.[K]

[Footnote K: _Roger Ludlow--The Colonial Lawmaker_--TAYLOR.]


Some of the authorities and records in witchcraft literature consulted
in the writing of this essay are here cited for reference and

Connecticut Archives: _Wyllys Papers, Original Witchcraft Depositions_;
Records: _General Court, Particular Court, Court of Assistants, County
Court, Colonial Boundaries, Crimes and Misdemeanors, Connecticut
Colonial, New Haven Colonial, Hartford Probate, New Haven Town; Magnolia
Christi Americana_ (MATHER); MATTHEW GRANT'S _Diary_ (TRUMBULL'S
_Observations_) _Courant Literary Section_, 12-3-1904; HOADLEY'S
_Witchcraft Trials and Notes_ (Manuscript); WINTHROP'S _History of New
England_; STILES' _History of Windsor; Blue Laws, True and False_
(TRUMBULL); PERKINS' _Discourse; The Literature of Witchcraft_ (BURR);
_Hammurabi's Code; Cent. Mag._, June, 1903; BLACKSTONE'S _Commentaries;
A Tale of the Witches_ (STONE); LECKY'S _Rationalism in Europe; The
Witch Persecutions_ (BURR); Encyc. Articles ("Witchcraft"): _Britannica,
Americana, International, Chambers', Johnson's; Connecticut: Origin of
her Courts and Laws_ (HAMERSLEY); BARBER'S _Connecticut Historical
Collections_; SCHENCK'S _Fairfield; Connecticut as a Colony and State_
(MORGAN et al.); _The House of the Seven Gables_ (HAWTHORNE); LATIMER'S
_Salem_; JOHNSTON'S _Nathan Hale; Connecticut History_ (TRUMBULL);
UPHAM'S _Salem Witchcraft; Conn. Mag_., Nov., 1899; Dalton's _Justice;
Mem. Hist, of Boston; Mem. Hist, of Hartford County_; Palfrey's _New
England; Historic Towns of New England_ (Latimer); _Giles Corey of the
Salem Farms_ (Longfellow); _New France and New England_ (Fiske); Scott's
_Demonology and Witchcraft_; Lowell's "Witchcraft" (_Among My Books_);
Whitmore's _Colonial Laws_; Drake's _Witchcraft Delusion in New
England_; Fowler's _Salem Witchcraft_; Hutchinson's _Hist, of
Massachusetts Bay_; Larned's _Hist, of Ready Reference_ (Mass.); Howe's
_Puritan Republic_; Goodwin's _Pilgrim Republic_; Merejkowski's _Romance
of Leonardo da Vinci_; Bulwer's _Last Days of Pompeii_; Weyman's _The
Long Night_; Crockett's _The Black Douglas_; Lea's _Hist, of the
Inquisition; Scarlet Letter_ (Hawthorne); _A Case of Witchcraft in
Connecticut_ (Hoadley); _Witches in Connecticut_ (Bliss); _Historical
Discourses_ (Bacon); _History of Wethersfield_ (Stiles); _History of
Long Island_ (Thompson), _Witchcraft in Boston_ (Poole); _Literature of
Witchcraft in New England_ (Winsor); _Witchcraft and Second Sight in the
Scottish Highlands_ (Campbell); _Witch-hunter in the Bookshops_ (Burr);
_Epidemic Delusions_ (Carpenter); _History of New England_ (Neal);
_History of Colonization of U.S._ (Bancroft); _Salem Witchcraft_
(Fowler); Bouvier's _Law Dic.; Witchcraft in Connecticut_ (Livermore);
_Witchcraft in Salem Village_, 1692 (Nevins); _History of Stratford and
Bridgeport_ (Orcutt); _Bench and Bar_ (Adams); Conway's _Demonology and
Devil-lore; Domestic and Social Life in Colonial Times_ (Warner); _Nat.
Mag._ Nov. 15, 1891.



Allyn, John 44, 51-56, 65-67, 71, 84, 106, 109, 117
Allyn, Thomas 148
Ashley, Jonathan 117
Austen, Thomas 103
Ayres, Goody 152, 157
Ayres, William 152


Baldwin, Goodwife 133, 137
Ball, Allen 94
Bankes, John 126
Barlow, Goodwife 135
Barlow, John 65
Barnard, Bartholomew 117
Barnes, Mary 152, 157
Bassett, Goody 130, 148, 156
Bates, Sarah 104
Bayley, Goodwife 149, 156
Bayley, Nicholas 149, 156
Belden, Samuel 51
Bell, Jonathan 44, 105-107, 110, 113
Benham, Winifred, Jr. and Sr. 155, 157
Benit, Elizabeth 67, 70
Benit, Thomas 67, 71
Benit, Thomas, Jr. 70
Birdsall, Goody 120
Bishop, Bridgett ix
Bishop, Ebenezer 108
Bishop, Edward ix
Bowman, Nathanael 117
Bracy, Thomas 49
Branch, Catherine 65, 103-104, 108-116
Brewster, Elizabeth 131
Brewster, Mary 132
Brundish, Bethia 134
Bryan, Ensign 126, 129
Bulkeley, Rev. Gershom 57
Bull, Joseph 117
Burr, Abigail 43
Burr, John 110, 119
Burr, Sarah 43
Buxstum, Clement 113


Carrington, Joan 38, 145, 147, 156
Carrington, John vii, 38, 145, 147, 156
Carter, Dr. Samuel T. 159
Chester, Stephen 117
Clarke, Mr. 38, 148
Clarke, Henry 50, 52, 53
Clarke, William 51
Clawson, Elizabeth 44, 63, 101-116, 154, 157
Clawson, Stephen 101
Cole, Ann 97
Collins, Samuel 117
Comstock, Christopher 133
Corey, Giles 15, 27
Corwin, George ix
Corwin, Jonathan 27
Cross, Abigail 104
Cross, Nathanael 104
Crotia, Hugh viii, 117-119, 155, 157
Cullick, Mr. 38, 56, 148


Davenport, Rev. John 85, 122, 125-128
Davis, Goody 120
Desborough, Nicholas 153, 157
Dickinson, Joseph 50
Disborough, Mercy 15, 44, 62-78, 154, 157
Disborough, Thomas 63, 65
Duning, Benjamin 65


Eaton, Theophilus 85, 125
Edwards, Goody 120
Edwards, Jonathan 158
Eliot, Joseph 76, 78


Finch, Abraham 107
Fowler, William 125, 138
Francis, Joane 53
Fyler, Walt. 85


Gardiner, Lion 119
Garlick, Elizabeth 119-121, 150, 156
Garlick, Joshua 119
Garney, Joseph 101
Garrett, Daniel 80
Garrett, Margaret 80
Gedney, Bartholomew 27
Gibbons, William 117
Gilbert, Lydia 148, 156
Gillett, Cornelius 117
Godfree, Ann 70
Godman, Elizabeth 85-96, 149, 156
Gold, Nathan 110, 119
Goodyear, Stephen 85-89, 92, 93
Gould, Goodwife 139
Grant, Matthew 146-147
Graves, John 52
Greensmith, Nathaniel 96-100, 151, 156
Greensmith, Rebecca 96-100, 151, 156
Grey, Henry 68, 69, 70
Griswold, Edward 38
Griswold, Michael 59
Grummon, John 70


Hale, Mary 54
Halliberch, Thomas 66
Hand, Goody 121
Harrison, Katherine 47-61, 153, 157
Hart, Stephen 38, 81
Harvey, Hannah 115, 154, 157
Harvey, Mary 154, 157
Hathorne, John 27
Haynes, John 38, 97, 98, 147
Heyden, Daniel 117
Hollister, Mr. 38
Holly, Samuel 109
Hooker, Thomas 162
Hopkins, Edward 38, 147
Hopkins, Matthew 21
Howard, Abigail 43
Howell, Goodwife 119
Hubbard, Elizabeth ix
Hull, Rebecca 133
Hull, Cornelius 133


Jennings, Margaret 150, 156
Jennings, Nicholas 150, 156
Jesop, Edward 63
Joanes, William 117
Johnson, Jacob 53
Johnson, Mary 35, 143, 144, 156
Jones, Martha 35
Jones, William 40
Judd, Theo. 38


Kecham, Sarah 103
Kelsey, Stephen 117
Knapp, Goodwife 109, 122-141, 156, 176


Lamberton, Desire 93
Lamberton, Elizabeth 86, 90
Lamberton, Hannah 86, 90
Langton, Joseph 117
Leawis, Will. 38
Leete, William 47, 125
Lewis, Mercy ix
Lockwood, Deborah 133
Lockwood, Robert 132
Lockwood, Susan 124, 131, 132, 136, 138
Loomis, Jonathan 117
Loomis, Nathanael 117
Ludlow, Roger 123, 125-129, 161-163
Lyon, Thomas 136, 138


Mansfield, Moses 117
Marsh, John 117
Mason, John 47
Mather, Cotton 28-34, 153
Meaker, William 149, 156
Migat, Mrs. 82
Miller, Goody 154, 157
Milton, Daniel 38
More, John 38
Montague, Richard 51
Mullener, Thomas 149
Mygatt, Joseph 117


Newell, Samuel 117
Newton, Thomas 27
North, Joseph 117
Norton 155, 157


Odell, Goodwife 124, 131, 135


Palmer, Katherine 157
Pantry, John 117
Pell, Luce 124, 130, 135, 138
Penoir, Lydia 112
Phelps, Abraham 117
Phelps, Mr. 38
Pitkin, William 78, 117
Pratt, Daniel 81
Pratt, John 38
Purdy, Goodwife 124, 135
Putnam, Ann ix, 30


Renels, John 141
Richards, John 27
Russel, William 120


Saltonstall, Nathl. 27
Sanford, Andrew 151, 157
Sanford, Mary 151, 156
Seager, Elizabeth 80-85, 152, 157
Selleck, David 108, 114
Selleck, Jonathan 106, 107, 110, 116
Sergeant, Peter 27
Sewall, Samuel 27
Shervington, Thomas 133, 138
Sherwood, Isaac 64
Sherwood, Mistress Thomas 124, 128, 135, 139
Slawson, Elezer 113
Smith, Elizabeth 56
Smith, Philip 51
Smith, Samuel 38, 50, 52, 53, 66
Spencer, Sarah 155, 157
Stanly, Caleb 117
Stanly, Nath. 78, 117
Staplies, Mary 125-141, 154, 157
Staplies, Thomas 125, 126
Steele, James 117
Sterne, Robert 81, 84
Stiles, Henry 148
Stirg, Joseph 66
Stoughton, John 117
Stoughton, William 27, ix


Tailecote, Mr. 38
Tash, John 140, 141
Tompson, J. 129, 135
Treat, Robert 48, 62, 117
Trumbull, J. Hammond v


Varlett, Judith 151, 157


Wadsworth, Joseph 117
Wakely, James 50
Wakeman, Sarah 43
Walcott, Mary ix
Walkley, James 153, 157
Ward, Andrew 134
Ward, Hester 129, 136
Ward, Thomas 117
Webster, Mr. 38
Wells, Mr. 38, 129
Wells, Hugh 49
Wescot, Abigail 106, 112
Wescot, Daniel 101-116
White, John 38
Whiting, Rev. John 96, 97
Whitlock, Goodwife 134
Wiat, Nath. 102
Willard, Josiah 81
Williams, Abigail ix
Williams, William 117
Willis, Samuel 78, 117
Wilson, Hannah 43
Wilton, David 51
Winthrop, John 35, 47, 143
Winthrop, Wait 27
Woodbridge, Rev. Timothy 76, 78
Woolcott, Mr. 38


Young, Alse 35, 145-147, 156


Back to Full Books