Essay
Document 1: The Trials of Elizabeth Godman, 1653 and 1655. Excerpted from John M. Taylor, The Witchcraft Delusion in Colonial Connecticut, 1647-1697 (New York: Grafton Press, 1908), 79-121.[footnoteRef:1] [1: Examine these as primary sources because, although not published at the time of the event, our definition asks when they were created. They are transcriptions of court documents created by people who witnessed the trials. ]
This first document can be a little confusing, because it is actually three court cases. The first occurred because Elizabeth Godman was requesting what we might call a cease and desist order. Essentially, she wanted her neighbors and housemates to stop saying she was a witch. Mrs. Godman was a widow who lived with Stephen Goodyear’s family (often spelled “Goodyeare” below). Goodyear was the Deputy Governor of the Connecticut colony, and Mrs. Godman was either a boarder or servant in his household. Her age is not given, but she died in 1660, so was presumably somewhere in that vague range we call “middle age.”
Mrs. Godman was told she hath warned to the court diverse persons, viz: Mr. Goodyeare, Mrs. Goodyeare, Mr. Hooke, Mrs. Hooke, Mrs. Atwater, Hanah and Elizabeth Lamberton, Goodwife Larremore, Goodwife Thorpe, andc., and was asked what she had to charge them with, she said they had given out speeches that made folks think she was a witch, and first she charged Mrs. Atwater to be ye cause of all, and to clear things desired a righting might be read which was taken in way of examination before ye magistrate, (and in here after entered,) wherein sundry things concerning Mrs. Atwater is specified which we now more fully spoken to, and she further said that Mrs. Atwater had said that she thought she was a witch and that Hobbamocke was her husband,[footnoteRef:2] but could prove nothing, though she was told that she was beforehand warned to prepare her witnesses ready, which she hath not done, if she have any. After sundry of the passages in ye righting were read, she was asked if these things did not give just ground of suspicion to all that heard them that she was a witch. She confessed they did, but said if she spoke such things as is in Mr. Hooke’s relation she was not herself.... Beside what is in the paper, Mrs. Godman was remembered of a passage spoken of at the governors about Mr. Goodyeare’s falling into a swonding[footnoteRef:3] fit after he had spoken something one night in the exposition of a chapter, which she (being present) liked not but said it was against her, and as soon as Mr. Goodyeare had done duties she flung out of the room in a discontented way and cast a fierce look upon Mr. Goodyeare as she went out, and immediately Mr. Goodyeare (though well before) fell into a swond, and beside her notorious lying in this business, for being asked how she came to know this, she said she was present, yet Mr. Goodyeare, Mrs. Goodyeare, Hanah and Elizabeth Lamberton all affirm she was not in ye room but gone up into the chamber. [2: Hobbamock is usually remembered as a Native American who helped the Plymouth Colony “pilgrims” – much like Squanto but more militant. His particular association with witchcraft is unclear, but New Englanders often associated “dark figures” in the forest with Satan, and in their minds those dark figures often became American Indians, especially as warfare between the cultures increased. Hobbamock, however, had been dead at least a decade before this hearing took place.] [3: People didn’t “swoon” so much as they “swound” in older English. This is still misspelled, but not as drastically as it may seem.]
First Case, May 12, 1653: Mrs. Elizabeth Godman Accuses Several People of Slander.
Elizabeth Godman made complaint of Mr. Goodyeare, Mrs. Goodyeare, Mr. Hooke, Mrs. Hooke, Mrs. Bishop, Mrs. Atwater, Hanah and Elizabeth Lamberton, and Mary Miles, Mrs. Atwater’s maid, that they have suspected her for a witch; she was now asked what she had against Mr. Hooke and Mrs. Hooke; she said she heard they had something against her about their son.
Testimony of Mr. Hooke: Mr. Hooke said he was not without fears, and he had reasons for it; first he said it wrought suspicion in his mind because she was shut out at Mr. Atwater’s upon suspicion, and he was troubled in his sleep about witches when his boy was sick, which was in a very strange manner, and he looked upon her as a malicious one, and prepared to that mischief, and she would be often speaking about witches and rather justify them than condemn them; she said why do they provoke them, why do they not let them come into the church. Another time she was speaking of witches without any occasion given her, and said if they accused her for a witch she would have them to the governor, she would trounce them. Another time she was saying she had some thoughts, what if the Devil should come to suck her, and she resolved he should not suck her.... Time, Mr. Hooke’s Indian, said in church meeting time she would go out and come in again and tell them what was done at meeting. Time asking her who told, she answered plainly she would not tell, then Time said did not ye Devil tell you.... Time said she heard her one time talking to herself, and she said to her, who talked you too, she said, to you; Time said you talked to ye Devil, but she made nothing of it. Mr. Hooke further said, that he hath heard that they that are addicted that way would hardly be kept away from ye houses where they do mischief, and so it was with her when his boy was sick, she would not be kept away from him, nor got away when she was there, and one time Mrs. Hooke bid her go away, and thrust her from ye boy, but she turned again and said she would look on him. Mrs. Goodyeare said that one time she questioned with Elizabeth Godman about ye boy’s sickness, and said what think you of him, is he not strangely handled, she replied, what, do you think he is bewitched; Mrs. Goodyeare said nay I will keep my thoughts to myself, but in time God will discover ...
Mr. Hooke further said, that when Mr. Bishop was married, Mrs. Godman came to his house much troubled, so as he thought it might be from some affection to him, and he asked her, she said yes; now it is suspicious that so soon as they were contracted Mrs. Bishop fell into very strange fits which hath continued at times ever since, and much suspicion there is that she hath been the cause of the loss of Mrs. Bishop’s children, for she could tell when Mrs. Bishop was to be brought to bed, and hath given out that she kills her children with longing, because she longs for everything she sees, which Mrs. Bishop denies....
Testimony of Mrs. Atwater: Another thing suspicious is, that she could tell Mrs. Atwater had figs in her pocket when she saw none of them; to that she answered she smelt them, and could smell figs if she came in the room, near them that had them; yet at this time Mrs. Atwater had figs in her pocket and came near her, yet she smelt them not; also Mrs. Atwater said that Mrs. Godman could tell that they one time had peas porridge, when they could none of them tell how she came to know, and being asked she saith she see them on the table, and another time she saith she was there in ye morning when the maid set them on. Further Mrs. Atwater saith, that that night the figs was spoken of they had strangers to supper, and Mrs. Godman was at their house, she cut a sopp and put in pan; Betty Brewster called the maid to tell her and said she was about her works of darkness, and was suspicious of Mrs. Godman, and spoke to her of it, and that night Betty Brewster was in a most miserable case, hearing a most dreadful noise which put her in great fear and trembling, which put her into such a sweat as she was all on a water when Mary Miles came to go to bed, who had fallen into a sleep by the fire which used not to do, and in ye morning she looked as one that had been almost dead....
Mrs. Godman rejoins: Mrs. Godman accused Mr. Goodyeare for calling her down when Mrs. Bishop was in a sore fit, to look upon her, and said he doubted all was not well with her, and that he feared she was a witch, but Mr. Goodyeare denied that; upon this Mrs. Godman was exceeding angry and would have the servants called to witness, and bid George the Scotchman go ask his master who bewitched her for she was not well, and upon this presently Hanah Lamberton (being in ye room) fell into a very sore fit in a very strange manner....
Another time Mrs. Goodyeare said to her, Mrs. Elizabeth [Godman] what think you of my daughter’s case; she replied what, do you think I have bewitched her; Mrs. Goodyeare said if you be the [culprit] look to it, for they intend to have such as is suspected before the magistrate.
Mrs. Godman charged Hanah Lamberton that she said she lay for somewhat to suck her, when she came in hot one day and put off some clothes and lay upon the bed in her chamber. Hanah said she and her sister Elizabeth went up into the garret above her room, and looked down and said, look how she lies, she lies as if somebody was sucking her, and upon that she arose and said, yes, yes, so there is; after said Hanah, she hath something there, for so there seemed as if something was under the clothes; Elizabeth said what have you there, she said nothing but the clothes, and both Hanah and Eliza[beth Lamberton] say that Mrs. Godman threatened Hanah, and said let her look to it for God will bring it upon her own head, and about two days after, Hanah’s fits began, and one night especially had a dreadful fit, and was pinched, and heard a hideous noise, and was in a strange manner sweating and burning, and some time cold and full of pain that she shrieked out.
Elizabeth Lamberton responds: Elizabeth Lamberton saith that one time ye children came down and said Mrs. Godman was talking to herself and they were afraid, then she went up softly and heard her talk, what, will you fetch me some beer, will you go, will you go, and ye like, and one morning about break of day Henry Boutele said he heard her talk to herself, as if somebody had lain with her....
Mrs. Goodyear responds: Mrs. Goodyeare said when Mr. Atwater’s kinswoman was married Mrs. Bishop was there, and the room being hot she was something faint, upon that Mrs. Godman said she would have many of these fainting fits after she was married, but she saith she remembers it not....
Goodwife Thorp’s testimony:[footnoteRef:4] Goodwife Thorp complained that Mrs. Godman came to her house and asked to buy some chickens, she said she had none to sell, Mrs. Godman said will you give them all, so she went away, and she thought then that if this woman was naught as folks suspect, maybe she will smite my chickens, and quickly after one chicken died, and she remembered she had heard if they were bewitched they would consume within, and she opened it and it was consumed in ye gizard to water and worms, and divers others of them dropped, and now they are missing and it is likely dead, and she never saw either hen or chicken that was so consumed within with worms. Mrs. Godman said Goodwife Tichenor had a whole brood so, and Mrs. Hooke had some so, but for Mrs. Hookes it was contradicted presently. This Goodwife Thorp thought good to declare that it may be considered with other things. [4: “Goodwife” was a female head of household – meaning she was, at the moment, an unmarried adult woman. “Mrs.” Godman was, as a widow, unmarried, but unqualified for the “Goodwife” label because she lived with the Goodyears.]
As silly as some of the testimony against Elizabeth Godman seems, the simple reality is that she had failed to bring any witnesses to supply testimony for her good behavior. That failure left the “court” (remembering that local court proceedings were held in churches) to decide that while there was not enough evidence to convict her of witchcraft, there was enough evidence to consider her a suspicious character. Even Mrs. Godman agreed that, had she done all those things people said she had, there would be reasonable grounds for witchcraft accusations. She was sent home with the warning that if she was charged again, the preceding statements would be used against her. Of course, she was charged again, just a little over two years later, and those statements were used against her, which is why they are included in this reading.
Second Case, August 7, 1655: Mrs. Elizabeth Godman is Accused of Witchcraft.
Elizabeth Godman was again called before the Court, and told that she lies under suspicion for witchcraft, as she knows, the grounds of which were examined in a former court, and by herself confessed to be just grounds of suspicion, which passages were now read, and to these some more are since added, which are now to be declared.
Testimony of Mr. Goodyear: Mr. Goodyeare said that the last winter, upon occasion of God’s afflicting hand upon the plantation by sickness, [before] the private meeting whereof he had appointed to set a day apart to seek God, Elizabeth Godman desired she might be there. He told her she was under suspicion, and it would be offensive. She said she had great need of it, for she was exercised with many temptations, and saw strange apparitions, and lights about her bed, and strange sights which affrighted her. Some of his family said if she was afraid they would work with her in the day and lie with her in the night, but she refused and was angry and said she would have none to be with her for she had her spiritual armor about her.
[The testimony was interrupted and Mrs. Godman] was asked the reason of this; she answered, she said so to Mr. Goodyeare, but it was her fancy [imagination] troubled her, and she would have none lie with her because her bed was weak. She was told that might have been mended; then she said she was not willing to have any of them with her, for if anything had fallen ill with them they would have said that she had been the cause.
Mr. Goodyeare further declared that about three weeks ago he had a very great disturbance in his family in the night (Elizabeth Godman having been the day before much discontented because Mr. Goodyeare warned her to provide another place to live in[footnoteRef:5]) his daughter Sellevant, Hanah Goodyeare, and Desire Lamberton lying together in the chamber under Elizabeth Godman. After they were in bed they heard her walk up and down and talk aloud, but could not tell what she said. Then they heard her go down the stairs and come up again. They fell asleep, but were after awakened with a great jumbling at the chamber door, and something came into the chamber which jumbled at the other end of the room and about the trunk and among the shoes and at the bed’s head. It came nearer the bed and Hanah was afraid and called [for her] father, but he heard not, which made her more afraid. Then clothes were pulled off their bed by something, two or three times. [The girls] held and something pulled, which frightened them so that Hanah Goodyeare called her father so loud as was thought might be heard to the meetinghouse, but the noise was heard to Mr. Samuell Eatons by them that watched with her[footnoteRef:6]. So after a while Mr. Goodyeare came and found them in a great fright; they lighted a candle and he went to Elizabeth Godman’s chamber and asked her why she disturbed the family; She [Mrs. Godman] said no, she was scared also and thought the house had been on fire, yet the next day she said in the family that she knew nothing till Mr. Goodyeare came up, which she said is true she heard the noise but knew not the cause till Mr. Goodyeare came; and being asked why she went down stairs after she was gone up to bed, she said to light a candle to look for two grapes she had lost in the floor and feared the mice would play with them in the night and disturb ye family, which reason in the Court’s apprehension renders her more suspicious. [5: The historian John Demos, in The Enemy Within: A Short History of Witch-Hunting (2008), makes the point that Godman was typical of many in New England who were repeatedly charged with (but never convicted of) witchcraft in that the charges seem, at least in part, to have been a method of getting rid of unlikable housemates and neighbors. Mr. Goodyear’s attempt to evict Mrs. Godman, then, was not unexpected. Rather, it may have been the larger point.] [6: Seemingly a neighbor, Mrs. Eaton, must have been ill or dying. Friends and family keeping her company could hear the shouting from the Goodyear house.]
Testimony of Allan Ball: Another time she [Elizabeth Godman] came into his yard; his wife asked what she came for; she said to see her calf. They had a suckling calf, which they tied in the lot to a great post that lay on the ground, and the calf ran away with that post as if it had been a feather and ran among Indian corn and pulled up two hills and stood still, after he tied the calf to a long heavy rail, as much as he could well lift. And one time she [Mrs. Godman] came into the yard and looked on the calf and it set a running and drew the rail after it till it came to a fence and gave a great cry in a lowing way and stood still; and in ye winter the calf died, do what he could, yet ate its meal well enough.
Some other passages were spoken of about Mrs. Yale, that one time there being some words betwixt them, with which Elizabeth Godman was unsatisfied. The night following Mrs. Yale’s things were thrown about the house in a strange manner. And one time being at Goodman Thorpe’s, about weaving some cloth, in which something discontented her, and that night they had a great noise in the house, which much affrighted them, but they know not what it was.
These things being declared the Court told Elizabeth Godman that they have considered them, with her former miscarriages [charges against her], and see cause to order that she be committed to prison, there to abide the Court’s pleasure, but because the matter is of weight, and the crime whereof she is suspected capital, therefore she is to answer it at the Court of Magistrates in October next.
Our court system has obviously advanced a great deal since 1655. Mrs. Godman brought forth no witnesses on her behalf at the first trial but, of course, she was not on trial in that case – she was the plaintiff and proved her point as all those she charged readily admitted they suspected her of witchcraft. It was the court that decided they were not guilty of slander, as they had grounds for suspicion. Fair enough. But as she was not the one on trial the evidence against her, by today’s standards, would need to be resubmitted by witnesses in the second trial. Note that not only was that not done, but there was no record of witnesses on Mrs. Godman’s behalf in the second trial, either. It was not until the sentencing hearing, which follows, that anyone spoke for Mrs. Godman – meaning that they were hearing new evidence after the verdict, another no-no by today’s standards.
Third Case, October 1655: Mrs. Elizabeth Godman is Sentenced.
Was again called before the court and told that upon grounds formerly declared which stand upon record, she by her own confession remains under suspicion for witchcraft, and one more is now added, and that is, that one time this last summer, coming to Mr. Hookes to beg some beer, was at first denied, but after, she was offered some by his daughter which stood ready drawn, which she had, yet went away in a muttering discontented manner, and after this, that night, though the beer was good and fresh, yet the next morning was hot, sour and ill tasted, yea so hot as the barrel was warm without side, and when they opened the bung it steamed forth; they brewed again and it was so also, and so continued four or five times, one after another.
She brought divers persons to the court that they might say something to clear her, and much time was spent in hearing them, but to little purpose, the grounds of suspicion remaining full as strong as before and she found full of lying, wherefore the court declared unto her that though the evidence is not sufficient as yet to take away her life, yet the suspicions are clear and many, which she cannot by all the means she hath used, free herself from, therefore she must forbear from going from house to house to give offence, and carry it orderly in the family where she is, which if she do not, she will cause the court to commit her to prison again, and that she do now presently upon her freedom give security for her good behavior; and she did now before the court engage fifty pound of her estate that is in Mr. Goodyeer’s hand, for her good behavior, which is further to be cleared next court, when Mr. Goodyeare is at home.
She was suffered to dwell in the family of Thomas Johnson, where she continued till her death, October 9th, 1660. (New Haven Town Records, Vol. ii, pp. 174,179.)
As long as we are admitting evidence after the verdict, there’s another point to consider in this case, as revealed in Carol Karlsen’s influential The Devil in the Shape of a Woman (1987). Karlsen’s research indicates that Elizabeth Godman died a fairly wealthy woman. In fact, Stephen Goodyear (who died broke) owed her money.
Document 2: The Trial of Rebecca (and Nathaniel) Greensmith, 1662. Excerpted from John M. Taylor, The Witchcraft Delusion in Colonial Connecticut, 1647-1697 (New York: Grafton Press, 1908), 79-121. [footnoteRef:7] [7: Examine these as primary sources because, although not published at the time of the event, our definition asks when they were created. They are transcriptions of court documents created by people who witnessed the trials. ]
Even one of our foremost colonial historians, John Demos, has only questions after examining the case of Rebecca Greensmith, so do not be surprised to find yourself similarly befuddled.[footnoteRef:8] It was probably the most spectacular trial of the Hartford witch scare of the 1860s which, were it not for the events in Salem, Massachusetts some thirty years later, would likely be the American benchmark for such scares. Document 3 in these readings is also related to the Hartford scare. Indeed, it is Rebecca Greensmith who accused Elizabeth Seager, leading to that trial. [8: His questions are: “Why did she admit so much? Was she delusional? Had she yielded to intolerable social and legal pressures?” John Demos, The Enemy Within: A Short History of Witch-Hunting (New York: Penguin Books, 2008), 111.]
The Hartford scare started, sadly enough, when a dying child blurted out the name of a neighbor. The grieving parents took this as an accusation and notified the authorities. The neighbors, a Mr. and Mrs. Ayres, proclaimed their innocence, tried to divert suspicion to others – it was Mr. Ayres who named Rebecca Greensmith – and then fled before their verdict, an act that only caused the townsfolk to become more certain that witchery was afoot. This feeling was heightened even further when a respectable townswoman, Ann Cole, became possessed and began naming those who tormented her. Rebecca Greensmith’s name was among them. She was jailed to await trial.
Nathaniel Greensmith was Rebecca’s third husband. The couple were well off for the time and place but failed to elicit the admiration of their neighbors. Rebecca, in particular, was found lacking in the category of social graces and was pronounced “lewd” and “ignorant” by one of the two ministers who interviewed her while in jail. During that interview, the ministers took notes, which became the bulk of the evidence against Rebecca and, subsequently, Nathaniel. They were formally charged on December 30, 1662, and Rebecca confirmed the testimony on January 8, 1663. There is no record of Nathaniel offering any defense.
The Confession of Rebecca Greensmith, 1662: She forthwith and freely confessed [these] things to be true: that she (and other persons named in the discourse) had familiarity with the devil. Being asked whether she had made an express covenant with him, she answered she had not, only as she promised to go with him when he called (which she had accordingly done several times). But that the devil told her that at Christmas they would have a merry meeting, and then the covenant should be drawn and subscribed. Thereupon the fore-mentioned Mr. Stone (being then in court) with much weight and earnestness laid forth the exceeding heinousness and hazard of that dreadful sin; and therewith solemnly took notice (upon the occasion given) of the devil’s loving Christmas.
A person at the same time present [one of the two ministers] being desired the next day more particularly to enquire of her about her guilt, it was accordingly done, to whom she acknowledged that though when Mr. Haynes [one of the two ministers] began to read she could have torn him in pieces, and was so much resolved as might be to deny her guilt (as she had done before) yet after he had read awhile, she was as if her flesh had been pulled from her bones, (such was her expression,) and so could not deny any longer. She also declared that the devil first appeared to her in the form of a deer or fawn, skipping about her, wherewith she was not much affrighted but by degrees he contrived talk with her; and that their meetings were frequently at such a place, (near her own house;) that some of the company came in one shape and some in another, and one in particular in the shape of a crow came flying to them. Amongst other things she owned that the devil had frequent use of her body.
That was more than enough to convict Rebecca, but she was not through. During the interview, she bore witness against her husband, who was indicted on December 30:
Nathaniel Greensmith thou art here indicted by the name of Nathaniel Greensmith for not having the fear of God before thine eyes, thou hast entertained familiarity with Satan, the grand enemy of God and mankind—and by his help hast acted things in a preternatural way beyond human abilities in a natural course for which according to the law of God and the established law of this commonwealth thou deservest to die.
Rebecca Greensmith testifies in Court January 8, 1662.
1. That my husband on Friday night last when I came to prison told me that now thou hast confessed against thyself let me alone and say nothing of me and I will be good unto thy children.
2. I do now testify that formerly when my husband hath told me of his great travail and labor I wondered at it how he did it this he did before I was married and when I was married I asked him how he did it and he answered me he had help that I knew not of.
3. About three years ago as I think it; my husband and I were in ye wood several miles from home and were looking for a sow that we lost and I saw a creature a red creature following my husband and when I came to him I asked him what it was that was with him and he told me it was a fox.
4. Another time when he and I drove our hogs into ye woods beyond ye [impound] that was to keep young cattle several miles off I went before ye hogs to call them and looking back I saw two creatures like dogs one a little blacker then ye other, they came after my husband pretty close to him and one did seem to me to touch him I asked him what they were he told me he thought foxes I was still afraid when I saw anything because I heard so much of him before I married him.
5. I have seen logs that my husband hath brought home in his cart that I wondered at it that he could get them into ye cart being a man of little body and weak to my apprehension and ye logs were such that I thought two men such as he could not have done it.
I speak all this out of love to my husband’s soul and it is much against my will that I am now necessitated to speak against my husband, I desire that ye Lord would open his heart to own and speak ye truth.
I also testify that I being in ye wood at a meeting there was with me Goody Seager Goodwife Sanford and Goodwife Ayres; and at another time there was a meeting under a tree in ye green by our house and there was there James Walkely, Peter Grant’s wife, Goodwife Aires and Henry Palmer’s wife of Wethersfield, and Goody Seager[footnoteRef:9], and there we danced, and had a bottle of sack: it was in ye night and something like a cat called me out to ye meeting and I was in Mr. Varlet’s orchard with Mrs. Judith Varlett and she told me that she was much troubled with ye Marshall Jonathan Gilbert and cried, and she said if it lay in her power she would do him a mischief, or what hurt she could. [9: The subject of Document 3.]
Remember that the residents of Hartford were already in “scare” mode. They suspected witchcraft and now they had confirmation of it. Rebecca had confessed, Nathaniel had not; both were executed by hanging before January ended. Reportedly, the possessed woman, Ann Cole, was no longer being tormented by Satan’s minions. In total, four “witches” were executed during the scare, the Greensmiths being half of those. Add to Professor Demos’ questions: what went on in that marriage to prompt what was essentially a murder-suicide? Or even: what went on in that jail cell?
Document 3: The Trial of Elizabeth Seager, 1662. From John M. Taylor, The Witchcraft Delusion in Colonial Connecticut, 1647-1697 (New York: Grafton Press, 1908), 79-121.[footnoteRef:10] [10: Examine these as primary sources because, although not published at the time of the event, our definition asks when they were created. They are transcriptions of court documents created by people who witnessed the trials. ]
The following trial transcript was made previous to the one featured in Document 2, but it was repeated in 1663 and, apparently, in 1665. Elizabeth Seager was charged with witchcraft on three separate occasions, but seemingly the same evidence was used in each case. Document 3 is a combination of those cases, then, accompanied by four verdicts.
In Document 2 we found that the town of Hartford was experiencing a witchcraft scare in the 1660s, the results being people fleeing the town, at least ten trials, six convictions, and four executions. The Hartford scare started, sadly enough, when a dying child blurted out the name of a neighbor. The grieving parents took this as an accusation and notified the authorities. The neighbors, a Mr. and Mrs. Ayres, proclaimed their innocence, tried to divert suspicion to others – it was Mr. Ayres who named Rebecca Greensmith, the woman featured in Document 2 – and then fled before their verdict, an act that only caused the townsfolk to become more certain that witchery was afoot. This feeling was heightened even further when a respectable townswoman, Ann Cole, became possessed and began naming those who tormented her. Rebecca Greensmith’s name was among them. She was jailed to await trial.
While in jail, Mrs. Greensmith gave a full confession and then proceeded to accuse several other townspeople of being her accomplices. Among those was Elizabeth Seager, who had already been tried for witchcraft earlier in the year. This is the transcript of that earlier trial:
The testimony of Robert Sterne: I saw this woman Goodwife Seager in the woods with three more women and with them I saw two black creatures like two Indians but taller. I saw likewise a kettle there over a fire. I saw the women dance round these black creatures and while I looked upon them one of the women Goodwife Greensmith said look who is yonder and then they ran away up the hill. I stood still and the black things came towards me and then I turned to come away. He further saith I knew the persons by their habits or clothes having observed such clothes on them not long before.
The testimony of Mrs. Migat: Mrs. Migat sayth she went out to give her calves meat, about five weeks since, and Goodwife Seager came to her and shaked her by ye arm, and said she how do you, how do you, Mrs. Migat.
2d Mrs. Migat also sayth: a second time goodwife Seager came her towards ye little river, a little below ye house which she now dwelleth in, and told her, that god was naught, god was naught, it was very good to be a witch and desired her to be one, she should not need fear going to hell, for she should not burn in ye fire Mrs. Migat said to her at this time that she did not love her; she was very naughty, and Goodwife Seager shaked her by ye hands and bid her farewell, and desired her, not to tell any body what she had said unto her.
3d Time. Mrs. Migat affirmeth that goodwife Seager came to her at ye hedge corner belonging to their house lot, and their spoke to her but what she could not tell, which caused Mrs. Migatt (as she sayth) to (turn) away with great fear.
Mrs. Migat sayth a little before ye flood this spring, Goodwife Seager came into their house, on a moon shining night, and took her by ye hand and struck her on ye face as she was in bed with her husband, whom she could wake, and then goodwife Seager went away, and Mrs. Migat went to ye door but darest not look out after her.
These particulars Mrs. Migat charged Goodwife Seager with being face to face, at Mr. Migat’s now [current] dwelling house.
Elizabeth Seager was acquitted of witchcraft in 1662. Then came the Greensmith accusation early in 1663, and by mid-January, Mrs. Seager was again on trial.
Elizabeth Seager thou art here indicted by the name of Elizabeth Seager for not having the fear of God before thine eyes thou hast entertained familiarity with Satan the grand enemy of God and mankind, and by his help hast acted things in a preternatural way beyond the ordinary course of nature, as also for that thou has committed adultery, and hast spoken blasphemy against God, contrary to the laws of God, and the established laws of this corporation [colony] for all or any of which crimes by the said laws thou deservest to die.
The prisoner pleaded not guilty of the indictment and referred herself to the trial of jury.
In this version we have some additional evidence. There is the issue of Elizabeth Greensmith’s accusation, but that has some troubling logical problems, namely how far are you willing to believe an admitted agent of evil? But at least one new testimony was brought before the court:
The testimony of Daniel Garrett, Sr., and of Margaret Garrett: Goodwife Garrett saith that goodwife Seager said there was a day kept at Mr. Willis in reference to Ann Cole; and she further said she was in great trouble even in agony of spirit, the ground as follows that she sent her own daughter Eliza Seager to goodwife Hosmer to carry her a mess a parsnips. Goodwife Hosmer was not home. She was at Mr. Willis at the fast. Goodman Hosmer and his son was at home. Goodman Hosmer bid the child carry the parsnips home again he would not receive them and if her mother desired a reason, bid her send her father and he would tell him the reason. Goodwife Seager upon the return of the parsnips was much troubled and sent for her husband and sent him up to Goodman Hosmer to know the reason why he would not receive the parsnips, and he told Goodman Seager it was because Ann Cole was at the fast at [which] Mr. Willis cried out against his wife as being a witch and he would not receive the parsnips lest he should be brought in hereafter as a testimony against his wife. Then Goodwife Seager said that Mr. Haynes [a local minister] had written a great deal of hodgepodge that Ann Cole had said that she was under suspicion for a witch, and then she went to prayer, and did adventure to bid Satan go and tell them she was no witch. This deponent after she had a little paused said, who did you say, then Goodwife Seger said again she had sent Satan to tell them she was no witch. This deponent asked her why she made use of Satan to tell them, why she did not beseech God to tell them she was no witch. She answered because Satan knew she was no witch. Goodman Garrett testifies that before him and his wife, Goodwife Seager said that she sent Satan to tell them she was no witch.
We underwritten do testify, that goodwife Seager said, (upon the relating of goodwife Garrett’s testimony, in reference to Seager sending Satan,) that the reason why she sent Satan, was because he knew she was no witch, we say Seager said Dame you can remember part of what I said, but you do not speak of the whole you say nothing of what I brought to prove that Satan knew that I was no witch. I brought that place in the Acts, about the 7 sons that spoke to the evil spirits in the name of Jesus whom Paul preacheth I have forgot their names.
And then we have some commentary made by a man who was present at the second trial and who may have been a member of the jury:
Commentary of John Talcott, present at the trial: January 16 1662. The causes why half the jury or more did in their vote cast Goody Seager (and the rest of the jury were deeply suspicious, and were at a great loss and staggering whereby they were sometimes likely to come up in their judgments to the rest, whereby she was almost gone and cast as the foreman expressed to her at giving in of the verdict) are these:
First it did appear by legal evidence that she had intimate familiarity with such as had been witches, viz Goody Sanford and Goody Ayers. Secondly this she did in open court stoutly deny saying the witnesses were prejudiced persons, and that she had no more intimacy than they themselves, and when the witnesses questioned with her about frequently being there [at Mrs. Ayers’ house] she said she went to learn to knit; this also she stoutly denied, and said of the witnesses they belie me, then when Mr. John Allen said did she not teach you to knit, she answered sturdily and said, I do not know that I am bound to tell you and at another time being pressed to answered she said, nay I will hold what I have if I must die, yet after this she confessed that she had so much intimacy with one of them as that they did change work one with another. Thirdly she having said that she did hate Goody Ayers it did appear that she bore her great deal more than ordinarily good will as appeared by relieving her in her trouble, and was covert way, and was troubled that is was discovered; likewise when Goody Ayers said in court, this will take away my life, Goody Seager shushed her with her hand and said hold your tongue with grinding teeth Mr. John Allen being one witness hereto when he had spoken, she said they seek my innocent blood; the magistrates replied, who she said everybody. Fourthly being spoken to about trial by swimming, she said the devil that caused me to come here can keep me up.
About the business of flying [unmentioned in the documents] the most part thought it was not legally proved.
Lastly the woman and Robert Sterne being both upon oath their witness was judged legal testimony or evidence only some in the jury because Sterne’s first words upon his oath were, I saw these women and as I take it Goody Seager was there though after that he said, I saw her there, I knew her well I know God will require her blood at my hands if I should testify falsely. Also because he said he saw her kettle, there being at so great a distance, they doubted that these things did not only weaken and blemish his testimony, but also in a great measure disable it for standing to take away life.
Puzzled? Here’s the verdict, but it might not be illuminating:
The jury return that they find the prisoner guilty of the indictment in that particular of adultery.
Elizabeth Seager had, in fact, been charged with adultery in addition to the witchcraft charge. Remember Mrs. Migat? She had been claiming Mrs. Seager was a witch, but the final line of her testimony reveals what was possibly the real problem. So Mrs. Seager was an adulteress (her punishment is unknown) but, due to a hung jury, not a witch. Yet (and finally) Elizabeth Seager’s troubles continued, for just two years later, in the summer of 1665, she was hauled before the court again:
Elizabeth Seager thou art here indicted by the name of Elizabeth Seager the wife of Richard Seager not having the fear of God before thine eyes thou has entertained familiarity with Satan the grand enemy of God and mankind and has practiced witchcraft formerly and continue to practice witchcraft for which according to the law of God and the established law of this corporation thou deserves to die.
The prisoner answered not guilty, and refers herself to be tried by God and the country.
The jury being called to return their verdict upon the indictment of Elizabeth Seager the foreman declares that they find the prisoner guilty of familiarity with Satan. June 26, 1665.
Finally! We’ve got the witch right where we want her! Somebody fetch me a rope. But not so fast. No less than the governor of the colony intervened before Seager could be sentenced and demanded the case be postponed for further evaluation. In 1666, an appeals court, called the Court of Assistants, decided that Mrs. Seager was not guilty because the evidence did not answer the indictment. No wonder, since mostly the same evidence had resulted in an acquittal, a hung jury, and a guilty verdict. It wasn’t long afterward that Mrs. Seager moved to Rhode Island (although if it was with Mr. Seager or Mr. Migat, the record does not show). Perhaps that was what the people of Hartford had wanted all along.
Document 4: The Trial of Elizabeth Clawson, 1692. Excerpted from John M. Taylor, The Witchcraft Delusion in Colonial Connecticut, 1647-1697 (New York: Grafton Press, 1908), 79-121. [footnoteRef:11] [11: Examine these as primary sources because, although not published at the time of the event, our definition asks when they were created. They are transcriptions of court documents created by people who witnessed the trials. ]
This is an interesting case if for no other reason than the trial begins just as the more infamous trials in Salem, Massachusetts, were winding down. Like Salem, this case involves a teenage girl, Katharine Branch, showing signs of being possessed and making accusations against two older women, Elizabeth Clawson and Mercy Disborough. However, Katharine Branch was the only person to apparently suffer bewitchment and neither of those accused confessed their guilt, while in Salem several girls were afflicted and there was more than one confession by older women.
Mercy Disborough decided to prove her innocence through the water test. A townsman pushed her under water, but Mrs. Disborough proved to be of a buoyant nature and, unfortunately for her and Justice, did not sink enough to satisfy the crowd of onlookers. As this was a sign that Satan did not want her dead, Mrs. Disborough was deemed guilty and received the death sentence. Fortunately, some of the town leaders turned the case over to outside judges, who granted a reprieve before the execution was carried out.
Mrs. Clawson elected to stand trial, the transcript of which follows. Essential to understanding the intricacies of the situation is the knowledge that Katharine Branch was a servant girl working for the Westcott family. The Westcotts and the Clawsons did not like each other.
For the most part these document sets are presented to students in much the way they are found in the publication they were excerpted from. However, other sources claim that Katherine Branch was examined (physically and otherwise) prior to the trial by Johnathan Selleck, a local official who would also serve as one of the judges at the trial. For that reason, Selleck’s statement is brought to the top.
June 28th 1692. Sergeant Daniel Westcott brought his maid Katharine Branch to my house to be examined, which was done as is within mentioned, and the said Katharine Branch being dismissed was got about 40 or 50 rods from my house, my Indian girl running back saying said Kate was fallen down and looked black in the face so my son John Selleck [Jr.] and cousin David Selleck went out and fetched her in, she being in a stiff fit—and coming out of that fit fell a shrieking, crying out “You kill me, Goody Clawson you kill me,” two or three times she spoke it and her head was bent down backwards almost to her back; and sometimes her arm would be twisted round the said Kate crying out you break my arm and with many such fits following, that two men could hardly prevent by all their strength the breaking of her neck and arm, as was thought by all the standers by; and in this manner said Kate continued all the night, and never came to her senses but had some little respite between those terrible fits and then said Kate would be talking to the appearances and would answer them and ask questions of them too many to be here inserted or remembered. They asked her to be as they were and then she should be well and we heard said Kate say “I will not yield to you for you are witches and your portion is hell fire to all eternity” and many such like expressions she had; telling them that Mr. Bishop had often told her that she must not yield to them, and that that day a Norwalk minister told her the same therefore she said “I hope God will keep me from yielding to you.” Said Kate said Goody Clawson “Why do you torment me so; I never did you any harm neither in word nor action;” saying “why are you all come now to afflict me.” Katherine told their names, saying Goody Clawson, Mercy Disborough, Goody Miller, and a woman and a girl, five of you.
There are actually six, enough to make this statement rather confusing and worthy of interruption. Goody Clawson is, of course, Elizabeth Clawson, with “Goody” being slang for “Goodwife.” Mercy Disborough, as already mentioned, underwent a separate trial. Goody Miller had moved to New York – not, apparently, to avoid prosecution, but because she had relatives there. Then there’s Mary “Goody” Staples and her daughter and granddaughter Mary and Hannah Harvey. For some reason, Staples and the Harvey women were not formally charged with witchcraft. Mrs. Staples had faced charges before and had been cleared, so that might be the reason she was not indicted in this case, but there is no apparent reason why Mary Harvey and Hannah Harvey were named but not indicted. Back to the investigation:
Then the said Kate spoke to the girl whom she called Sarah, and said is Sarah Staples your right name; I am afraid you tell me a lie; tell me your right name; and so urged it much; and then stopped and said, tell; yes I must tell my master and Capt. Selleck if they ask me but I’ll tell nobody else. So at last said Kate said, Hannah Harvy once or twice out is that your name why then did you tell me a lie before; Well then said Kate what is the woman that comes with you; and so stopped and then said I tell you I must tell my master and Capt. Selleck if he asks me, but I’ll tell nobody else, and said you will not tell me then I will ask Goody Crump and she said Goody Crump what is the woman’s name that comes with Hannah Harvy; and so urged several times, a then said Mary Mary what, and then Mary Harvy; well said Kate is Mary Harvy ye mother of Hannah Harvy; and then said now I know it seeming to rejoice, and saying Hannah why did you not tell me before, saying there was more cats come at first and I shall know all your names; and Kate said what creature is that with a great head and wings and nobody and all black, saying Hannah is that your father; I believe it is for you are a witch; and said Kate said Hannah what is your father’s name; and have you no grandfather and grandmother; how come you to be a witch and then stopped, and said again a grandmother what is her name and then stopped, and said Goody Staples what is her maiden name and then again fell into terrible fits which much affrighted the standers by, which were many persons to behold and hear what was said and done by Kate. She fell into a fit singing songs and then tunes as Kate said gigs for them to dance by each taking their turns; then said Kate rehearsed a great many verses, which are in some primers, and also ye dialogue between Christ ye young man and the devil, the Lord’s prayer, all the [ten] commandments and catechism, the creed and several such good things, and then said, Hannah I will say no more; let me hear you, and said why do I say these things; you do not love them and a great deal more she said which I cannot well remember but what is above and on ye other side was heard and seen by myself and others as I’ve attested to it.
To add one thing more to my relation as is within of what I saw and heard, is that some persons attempted to cut off a lock of the said Kate’s hair, when she was in her fits but could not do it, for although she knew not what was said and done by them, and let them come never so privately behind her to do it yet she would at once turn about and prevent it; At last David Waterbury took her in his arms to hold her by force; that a lock of hair might be cut; but though at other times a weak and light girl yet she was then so strong and so extremely heavy that he could not deal with her, nor her hair could not be cut; and Kate crying out bitterly, as if she had been beaten all ye time. When said Kate come to herself, was asked if she was willing her hair should be cut; she answered yes—we might cut all of it we would.
Johnathan Selleck, Commissioner
Selleck was apparently undecided on what course of action to follow, and so started an investigative committee, the members of which all have military rank, indicating their offices in the colony’s militia. The investigation took up most of the summer and included an examination of the bodies of the accused women in a search for moles or other marks which were commonly associated with witches. Any marks they found were considered inconclusive evidence. But the committee’s findings give us an overview of Katharine Branch’s bewitching.
Upon ye information and sorrowful complaint of Sergeant Daniel Westcott in regard of his maid servant Cateran Branch whom he suspects to be afflicted of witchcraft, under which sore affliction she hath now labored upwards of five weeks, and in that lamentable state yet remains. In order to inquire and search into (the) matter were then present Major Nathan Golde, Capt. John Burr, Capt. Jonothan Selleck, Lieutenant Jonathan Bell.
Being in ye fields gathering of herbs, she was seized with a pinching and pricking at her breast; she being come home fell a crying, was asked ye reason, gave no answer but wept and immediately fell down on ye floor with her hands clasped, and with like actions continued with some respite at times ye space of two days, then said she saw a cat, was asked what ye cat said she answered ye cat asked her to [go] with her, with a promise of fine things and that if she should go where there were fine folks; and still was followed with like fits, seeming to be much tormented, being asked again what she saw said cats, and that they told her they would kill her, and with this menacing disquieted her several days; after that she saw in ye room where she lay a table spread with variety of meats, and they asked her to eat and at ye table she saw ten eating, this she positively affirmed when in her right mind, after this was exceeding much tormented, her master asked her what was ye matter, because she as she said in her fit run to sundry places to abscond herself, she told him ‘twas because she saw a cat coming to her with a rat, to fling in her face, after that she said they told her they would kill her because she told of it. These sort of actions continued about 13 days, and then was extremely afflicted with fits in ye night, to ye number of about 40 crying out a witch, a witch, her master running to her asked her what was ye matter she said she felt a hand. Ye next week she saw as she said a woman stand in ye house having on a silk hood and a blue apron, after that in ye evening being well composed going out of doors run in again and caught her master about ye middle, he asked her ye reason, she said that she met an old woman at ye door, with 2 firebrands in her forehead, he asked her what kind of clothes she had on, answered she had two homespun coats, one tucked up round her ye other down. The next day she named a person calling her Goody Clawson, and said there she is sitting on a [fence] rail, and again said she saw her sit on ye pommel of a chair, saying I’m sure you are a witch, else you could not sit so and said she saw this person before named at times for a week together. One time she said she saw her and described her whole attire, her [master] went immediately and saw ye woman named exactly attired as she was described of ye person afflicted. Again she said in her fits Goody Clawson let’s have a turn at heels over head, withal saying shall you go first, or shall I. Well said she if I do first you shall after, and with that she turned over two or three times heels over head, and so lay down, saying come if you will not I’ll beat your head and ye wall together and having ended these words she got up looking about ye house, and said look she’s gone, and so fell into a fit.
These two investigations provided enough grounds for the men to make formal charges, and in October a trial of Elizabeth Clawson was able to begin.
Indictment: Elizabeth Clawson wife of Stephen Clawson of Stamford in the country of Fairfield in the Colony of Connecticut thou art here indicted by the name of Elizabeth Clawson that not having the fear of God before thine eyes thou hast had familiarity with Satan the grand enemy of God and man and that by his instigation and help thou hast in a [unnatural] way afflicted and done harm to the bodies and estates of sundry of his Majesty’s subjects or to some of them contrary to the peace of or Sovereign Lord the King and Queen their crown and dignity and that on the 25th of April in the 4th year of their Majesties reign and at sundry other times for which by the law of God and the law of the Colony thou deserves to die.
Then follows the testimony of the witnesses, some of whom are only providing evidence that Elizabeth Clawson is a good person, others that Katharine Branch cannot be trusted, and still others who witnessed Branch’s possession episodes. Note that “Katharine” is spelled in a variety of ways, and that sometimes she is referred to as “Kate” or even “the French girl.”
Testimony of Joseph Garney: Joseph Garney saith that being at Daniel Westcott’s upon occasion since he went to Hartford while he was gone from home Nathaniel Wyatt being with me his maid being at work in the yard in her right mind soon after fell into a fit. I took her up and carried her in and laid her upon the bed it was intimated by some that she dissembled. Nathaniel Wyatt said with leave he would make trial of that leave was granted and as soon as she was laid upon ye bed then Wyatt asked me for a sharp knife which I presently took into my hand then she immediately came to herself and then went out of ye room into ye other room and so out into ye hen house then I heard her presently shriek out I ran presently to her and asked her what is ye matter, she was in such pain she could not hew and presently fell into a fit stiff. We carried her in and laid her upon ye bed and then I got my knife ready and fitting under pretense of doing some great matter then presently she came to herself and said to me Joseph what are you about to do I said I would cut her and seemed to threaten great matters, then she laid her down upon the bed and said she would confess to us how it was with her and then said I am possessed with ye devil and he appeared to me in ye hen house in ye shape of a black cat and was earnest with her to be a witch and if she would not he would tear her in pieces, then she again shrieked out now saith she I see him and looked wistfully and said there he is just at this time to my appearance there seemed to dart in at ye west window a sudden light across ye room which did startle and amaze me at that present, then she told me that she see ye devil in ye shape of a white dog, she told me that ye devil appeared in ye shape of these three women namely Goody Clawson, Goody Miller, and ye woman at Compo [Disborough]. I asked her how she knew that it was ye devil that appeared in ye shape of these three women she answered he told me so. I asked her if she knew that these three women were witches or not she said she could not tell they might be honest women for ought she knew or they might be witches.
Testimony of Sarah Kecham: She saith that being at Daniel Westcott’s house Thomas Asten being there Kateran Branch being there in a fit as they said I asked then how she was they saith she hath had no fits she had been a riding then I asked her to ride and then she got to riding. I asked her if her horse had any name and she called out and said Jack; I then asked her to sing and then she sung; I asked her that if she had sung with English she could then sing French and then she sung that which they called French. Thomas Astin said he knew that she was bewitched I told him I did not believe it, for I said I did not believe there was any witch in the town, he said he knew she was for said he I have heard say that if a person were bewitched take a naked sword and hold over them and they will laugh themselves to death and with that he took a sword and held over her and she laughed extremely. Then I spoke something whereby I gave them to understand that she did so because she knew of ye sword, whereupon Daniel made a sign to Thomas Astin to hold ye sword again that she might not know of it, which he did and then she did not laugh at all nor change her countenance. Further in discourse I heard Daniel Westcott say that when he pleased he could take her out of her fits. John Bates, Jr. being present at ye same time witnessed to all ye above written.
Testimony of Abigail Cross: Upon some discourse with Daniel Westcott about his girls dissembling said Daniel said that he would venture both his cows against a calf that she should do a trick tomorrow morning that nobody else could do. Said Abigail said to morrow morning, can you make her do it when you will; and he said yes when I will I can make her do it.
Nathaniel Cross being present at ye same time testifieth ye same with his wife.
The testimony of Mrs. Sarah Bates: She saith that when first ye girl was taken with strange fits she was sent for to Daniel Wescott’s house and she found ye girl lying upon ye bed. She then did apprehend that the girl’s illness might be from some natural cause; she therefore advised them to burn feathers under her nose and other means that had done good in fainting fits and then she seemed to be better with it; and so she left her that night in hopes to here she would be better ye next morning; but in ye morning Daniel Westcott came for her again and when she came she found ye girl in bed seemingly senseless and speechless; her eyes half shut but her pulse seemed to beat after ye ordinary manner her mistress desired she might be let blood on ye foot in hopes it might do her good. Then I said I thought it could not be done in ye capacity she was in but she desired a trial to be made and when everything was ready and we were going to let her bleed ye girl cried; the reason was asked her why she cried; her answer was she would not be blooded; we asked her why; she said again because it would hurt her it was said ye hurt would be but small like a prick of a pin then she put her foot over ye bed and was ready to help about it; this carriage of her seemed to me strange who before seemed to lie like a dead creature; after she was blooded and had laid a short time she clapped her hand upon ye coverlid and cried out; and on of ye girls that stood by said mother she cried out; and her mistress was so affected with it that she cried and said she is bewitched. Upon this ye girl turned her head from ye folk as if she would hide it in ye pillow and laughed.
Testimony of Daniel Westcott: Saith that some years since my wife and Goodwife Clawson agreed to change their spinning, and instead of half a pound Goodwife Clawson sent three quarters of a pound I having weighed it, carried it to her house and convinced her of it that it was so, and thence forward she till now took occasion upon any frivolous matter to be angry and pick a quarrel with both myself and wife, and some short time after this earning ye flax, my eldest daughter Johanna was taken suddenly in ye night shrieking and crying out, There is a thing will catch me, upon which I got up and lit a candle, and told her there was nothing, she answered, yes there was, there ‘tis, pointing with her finger sometimes to one place and sometimes to another, and then said ‘tis run under the pillow. I asked her what it was, she said a sow, and in a like manner continued disturbed at nights about ye space of three weeks, insomuch that we were forced to carry her abroad sometimes into my yard or lot, but for ye most part to my next neighbor’s house, to undress her and get her to sleep, and continually when she was disturbed she’d cry out there’s my thing come for me, whereupon some neighbors advised to a removal of her, and having removed her to Fairfield it left her, and since then hath not been disturbed in like manner.
Testimony of Abigail Westcott: Abigail Westcott further saith that as she was going along the street Goody Clawson came out to her and they had some words together and Goody Clawson took up stone and threw at her; and at another time as she went along the street before said Clawson’s door Goody Clawson called to me and asked me what I did in my chamber last Sabbath day night, and I do affirm that I was not there that night; and at another time as I was in her son Stephen’s house being near her one house she followed me in and contended with me because I did not come into her house calling of me proud slut what are you proud on your fine clothes and you look to be mistress but you never shall by me and several other provoking speeches at that time and at another time as I was by her house she contended and quarreled with me; and we had many words together and she [berated] me for my fine clothes … and also contended with me several other times.
Testimony of Abraham Finch, Jr.: The deponent saith that he being a watching with ye French girl [Katharine Branch] at Daniel Westcott’s house in the night I being laid on the bed the girl fell into a fit and fell across my feet and then I looking up I saw a light about the bigness of my two hands glance along the [wall] of the house to the hearthward, and afterwards I saw it no more; and when David Selleck brought a light into the room a little space after the French girl came to herself again. We asked her why she screamed out when she fell into her fit. She answered Goodie Clawson came in with two fiery eyes.
Furthermore the deponent saith that David Selleck was that same night with him and being laid down on the bed nigh the girl and I lay by the bed side on the chest and David Selleck started up suddenly and I asked what was ye matter with him and he answered she pricked me and the French girl answered no she did not it was Goodie Crump and then she put her hand over the bed side and said give me that thing that you pricked Mr. Selleck with and I catched hold of her hand and found a pin in it and I took it away from her. The deponent saith that when the girl put her hand over the bed it was open and he looked very well in her hand and could see nothing and before she pulled in her hand again she had gotten that pin that he took from her.
Testimony of Ebenezer Bishop: Ebenezer Bishop aged about 26 years saith one night being at Daniel Westcott’s house Cateran Branch being in one of her fits I sat down by ye bed side next to her she then calling earnestly upon Goody Clawson Goody Clawson several times now Goody Clawson turn heels over head after this she had a violent fit and calling again said now they are going to kill me and crying out very loud that they pinched her on ye neck and calling out that they pinched her again I sitting by her I took ye light and look upon her neck and I see a spot look red seeming to me as big as a piece of eight afterwards it turned blue and blacker than any other part of her skin and after ye second time of her calling I took ye light and looked again and she pointed with her hand lower upon her shoulder and I see another place upon her shoulder look red and blue as I saw upon the other place before and then after that she had another fit.
Hannah Knapp testified the same to the above written and further added that she saw scratches upon her; and is ready to give oath to it if called to it.
Testimony of Samuel Holly: The testimony of Samuel Holly, Sr. aged about fifty years saith that he being at ye house of Daniel Westcott in ye evening I did see his maid Cateran Branch in her fit that she did swell in her breasts (as she lay on her bed) and they rise as like bladders and suddenly passed into her belly, and in a short time returned to her breast and in a short time her breasts fell and a great rattling in her throat as if she would have been choked; All this I judge beyond nature.
Daniel Westcott testified to ye same above written and further added that when she was in those fits rattling in her throat she would put out her tongue to a great extent I conceive beyond nature and I put her tongue into her mouth again and then I looked in her mouth and could see no tongue but as if it were a lump of flesh down her throat and this often times.
Testimony of Daniel Westcott: The testimony of Daniel Westcott aged about forty nine years saith that sometime this spring since his maid Cateron Branch had fits and with many other strange actions in her, I see her as she lay on the bed at her length in her fit, and at once sprang up to the chamber floor without the help of her hands or feet; that’s near six feet and I judge it beyond nature for any person so to do.
Testimony of Lidia Penoir: She saith that she heard her aunt Abigail Westcott say that her servant girl Cateran Branch was such a lying girl that not anybody could believe one word what she said and saith that she heard her aunt Abigail Westcott said that she did not believe that Mercy nor Goody Miller nor Hannah nor any of these women whom she had impeached was any more witches than she was and that her husband would believe Cateran before he would believe Mr. Bishop or Lieutenant Bell or herself.
Testimony of Elezer Slason aged 51 year: He saith that he lived near neighbor to Goodwife Clawson many years and did always observe her to be a woman for peace and to counsel for peace and when she hath had provocations from her neighbors would answer and say we must live in peace for we are neighbors and would never to my observation give threatening words nor did I look at her as one given to malice; and further saith not.
This particular trial is not often footnoted in major studies of colonial witchcraft trials. Those historians who do mention it tend to find that it is essentially a feud between the Clawsons and the Westcotts, both of whom bring in their friends to testify. Notice that most of those who seem to believe Katharine Bran
It is also possible to examine the document in terms of the power of latent sexuality. Notice the number of times that male witnesses mention touching Katherine Branch, catching her, grasping her, carrying her. One witness, Samuel Holly, focused most of his testimony on her breasts. These men seem to have believed that Katherine Branch was a victim and that they were coming to her rescue. Viewed in that way, Katharine Branch may have just been a flirtatious young woman who wanted some attention. Being a house maid was probably a boring life for a seventeen-year-old woman.
The jury may have taken either of those readings – or neither – into account when reaching its decision. All we know for sure is that:
Elizabeth Clawson was found not guilty.
21