In 1693, Mather wrote an account of afflictions which Margaret Rule, of
Boston, then about seventeen years old, began to endure on the 10th of
September of that year. This production drew forth the first open shot at
the then prevalent definitions of witchcraft--at the assumed source of
power to produce it--at the adopted methods of proceedings against it, and
at treatment of persons on whom that crime was charged.
Robert Calef, called a merchant of the town, either listened to statements
or received written ones, made by other persons who had been present with
Mather around this afflicted girl at her home during some scenes which the
latter had described, or he was himself a witness there. From data early
obtained he furnished a version of the case which disparaged the
minister's account, and questioned the propriety of some of his
proceedings. Calef's was in itself a rather meager production, not putting
forth the whole or even the main facts in the case, but indicating that in
this, that, and the other particular, Mather had misstated or overstated,
and that some of his own acts might be indelicate or improper. This
production so incensed Mather that he openly pronounced Calef "the worst
of liars," threatened him with prosecution for slander, and actually
commenced legal proceedings against him.
In a subsequent letter, September 29, Calef respectfully asked Mather for
a personal interview in the presence of two witnesses, in order that they
might discuss and explain. Mather intimated willingness to comply with the
request, but dallied, till Calef, November 24, sent a second letter, in
which, rising at once above the comparatively trifling question whether
himself or Mather had furnished the more accurate and better report, he
grappled with fundamental questions pertaining to the devil, witchcrafts,
and possession, and set forth distinctly some points which, in his
judgment, needed discussion then; for on them he dissented from Mather,
and probably from a majority of the people amid whom he was living. In
much of that letter, Calef, or whoever composed it, manifested
discriminating intellect, clear perception of his points, firm will,
together with strong desire and purpose to labor earnestly for
acquisition of knowledge by which either to convince himself that his own
positions were unsound, or to better qualify himself to reform some
prevalent faiths and practices. The Bible was his magazine, and
implements, weapons, or stores from any other source he deemed it unlawful
to use for defining, detecting, or punishing witchcraft. Bowing to the
Scriptures in unquestioning submission, he took them as guide and
authority. In the outset, frankly and definitely stating his own belief,
he, in an apparently manly way, sought manly discussion.
He believed, page 62, that "there are _witches, because the Scriptures
plainly provide for their punishment_." The only known definition of
_witchcraft_ that to him seemed based upon and fairly deduced from the
Scriptures, was "a maligning and oppugning the word, work, or worship of
God, and, _by any extraordinary sign_, seeking to seduce from it." He
believed "that there are possessions, and that the bodies of the possest
have hence been not only _afflicted_, but _strangely agitated_, if not
_their tongues improved_ to foretell futurities; and why not _to accuse
the innocent_ as bewitching them? having _pretense to divination_ ... this
being reasonable to be expected from _him who is the father of lies_."
This witchcraft assailant, therefore, was a protestant not against belief
that the father of lies sometimes _possessed, afflicted, and strangely
agitated human beings, and also controlled their tongues to prophesy, to
accuse the innocent, and to pretend divination_. His protest was against
unscriptural definition of witchcraft, and against those kinds of
evidence, rules, and methods used for its detection, proof, and
punishment which made his age pronounce guilty and execute many who could
not possibly be found guilty of that crime, where its scriptural
definition was adhered to. He was not a disbeliever in witchcraft of some
kind, nor of action upon men by some invisible intelligences in his own
day. He and Mather both were believers in witchcraft outwrought by
supernals, but differed as to what might or might not constitute it, and
therefore, also, as to the extent of the prevalence of the genuine
article. Calef seemingly believed in _possessions_,--that is, in control
by spirits of some quality,--but was unwilling to concede that such
control was _witchcraft_, as many people at that day did, though Mather
may not have been one among them _abidingly_.
The pith of Calef's definition of witchcraft was, _seduction of men from
the worship of God by manifestation of extraordinary signs_; while Mather
said, _covenanting with the devil made one a witch_, and co-operative
action with _him_ in harming men constituted _witchcraft_. The former
demanded evidences of seduction of men away _from worship of God_, while
the other could rest on evidences of _visible harm to man_; therefore
Mather found cases of witchcraft much more abundant than Calef was
required to or would.
Another practically important item on which they differed was the
immediate source of the devil's power to act upon visible man and matter.
Calef claimed that "it is _only the Almighty_ that ... can commissionate
him to hurt or destroy any;" while Mather said, "I am apt to think that
the devils are seldom able to hurt us in any of our exterior concerns
without a commission _from our fellow-worms_.... Permission from God for
the devil to come down and break in upon mankind must oftentimes be
accompanied with a commission from _some of mankind itself_."
Both of them conceded a commission by God to the devil. But we doubt
whether his commission was ever more special than that which every created
being, in either material or spiritual abodes, constitutionally holds at
all times, to avail himself of whatever natural laws or forces his
inherent powers and attending circumstances enable him to control. Words
are often used which obscure proper, if not intended, meaning. Commission
from God means no more than constitutional capabilities to perform at
times certain specified things when conditions and circumstances favor
command of natural forces. That special powers are often conferred upon
mortals by some supernal beings whose recipients are prone to ascribe the
gifts to _omnipotence_ is obviously true; though their increased abilities
are only bestowments by finite invisibles.
_What_ witchcraft was, and _who_ commissioned the devil, whether God alone
or God and man jointly, were the two most prominent questions about which
those contestants differed. They agreed that the devil enacted both
witchcraft and possession, but Calef's beliefs necessarily caused him to
regard vast many cases as only simple possession, which Mather could, if
he saw fit, regard as witchcrafts; and he sometimes seemingly did, when
called to act publicly in connection with them. Mather at home and Mather
abroad were not always in harmony.
Without designing, either here or subsequently, to make full presentation
of the case of Margaret Rule, we shall freely adduce many parts of the
record of it as helps in exhibiting leading positions and traits
pertaining to the parties who crossed intellectual swords over them.
Mather states, page 29, that "upon the Lord's day, September 10, 1693,
Margaret Rule, after some hours of previous disturbance in the public
assembly, fell into odd fits, which caused her friends to carry her home,
where her fits, in a few hours, grew into a figure that satisfied the
spectators of their being preternatural. A miserable woman who had been
formerly imprisoned on the suspicion of witchcraft, and who had frequently
cured very painful hurts, ... had, the evening before Margaret fell into
her calamities, _very bitterly treated her, and threatened her_." That
briefly antecedent treatment of her by a person who "had frequently cured
very painful hurts," and therefore, and for other acts perhaps, been
accused of witchcraft, is very important in its psychological indications,
and is worthy of being borne along in the reader's memory. The wonderful
_curing of painful hurts_--that is, her beneficence--had caused her
imprisonment.
"The young woman," continues the reporter, "was assaulted by eight cruel
specters, whereof she imagined that she knew three or four." She was
careful, under charge from Mather, "to forbear blazing their names," but
privately told them to him; and he says, "they are a sort of wretches who
for these many years have gone under _as violent presumptions of
witchcraft_, as perhaps any creatures yet living on the earth." Specters
known by her might, in some connections, mean persons whom she had known
before their death, whose spirits now became visible; but since she gave
the names of living persons as being then seen, it is obvious that she did
not regard her tormentors _as bona fide spirits_, but only effigies
manufactured, presented, and vitalized by the devil.
The psychologist will not overlook the fact that persons whose specters
were here presented were such as had in some way previously aroused
suspicion that they were witches. It was imprudent at that day to "blaze
names," because of very prevalent belief that the devil could present the
specters of none who had not made a covenant with him, and the bare fact
of annunciation by a witched person that she saw the specter of any
individual whatsoever, was then conclusive proof to many minds that the
said individual had made covenant with the evil one, and therefore was a
witch, and must be put to death. Mather cautioned the girl not to give
names to the crowd around her bed, "lest any good person should come to
suffer any blast of reputation." Neither Mather nor Calef denied the
devil's power to bring forth apparitions of the _innocent_; and neither
reposed full confidence in or justified the use of spectral testimony
generally, though very many people in those days did. The point we desire
to mark is this: that Mather's account is in harmony with modern
observation in giving indications that spirits, apparitions, or
appearances of highly mediumistic persons are more frequently seen than
those of unimpressible ones--if such are not, and we believe it is so--the
class generally thus presented:--such persons, that is, the mediumistic,
are more frequently than others seen by the inner or clairvoyant eye. This
fact begets at least conjecture, that it is probably psychological law,
and not the devil's or any one's else _choice_, which determines who shall
or may be seen as specters. Persons seen in this case had previously
manifested powers or acts which caused them to be regarded as witches.
Around most persons, who in the sequel of these pages shall be found
appearing as specters and as bewitching and tormenting others, will be
found signs that they were very like such as to-day are called mediums.
"They presented a book and demanded of her that she should set her hand to
it, or touch it at least with her hand, as a sign of her becoming a
servant of the devil;" upon her refusal to do that, they confined "her to
her bed for just six weeks together." True answer to the question whether
an accused one had signed the devil's book or not, was eagerly sought for
in all trials for witchcraft, because if such signature had not been made
by the person on trial, he or she _might_ be innocent; while if it had
been, guilt was already consummated, and death was deserved.
"Sometimes there looked in upon the young woman a short and a black man,
whom they (the specters) called their master. They all professed
themselves vassals of this devil, ... and in obedience to him, ... she was
cruelly pinched with invisible hands, ... and the black and blue marks of
the pinches became immediately visible unto the standers by.... She would
every now and then be miserably hurt with pins, which were found stuck
into her neck, back, and arms.... She would be strangely distorted in her
joints and thrown ... into convulsions." Such things are stated as facts,
and were not contested in the day of their occurrence--not even by Robert
Calef.
"From the time that Margaret Rule first found herself to be formally
besieged by the specters, until the ninth day following, namely, from
September 10th to the 18th, she kept an entire fast, and yet she was unto
all appearance as fresh, as lively, as hearty at the nine days' end, as
before they began; during all this time ... if any refreshment were
brought unto her, her teeth would be set, and she would be thrown into
many miseries; indeed, once or twice or so in all this time, her
tormentors permitted her to swallow a mouthful of somewhat that might
increase her miseries, whereof a spoonful of rum was the most
considerable; but otherwise, as I said, her fast unto the ninth day was
very extreme and rigid."
Protracted fastings without consequent exhaustion have been common with
the mediumistic in all ages. Moses, Elijah, Jesus, each fasted forty days;
many mediums in our midst are often sustained for long periods by
absorptions of nutriment in its elemental state into the inner or spirit
organism, from that invisible storehouse of food from which trees obtain
much sustenance, and whence once came loaves and fishes in Judea; from the
inner thus fed, the outer man receives supplies; at least, spirits state
such to be the process.
"Margaret Rule once, in the middle of the night, lamented sadly that the
specters threatened the drowning of a young man in the neighborhood, whom
she named unto the company; well, it was afterward found that at that very
time this young man, having been prest on board a man-of-war then in the
harbor, was, out of some dissatisfaction, attempting to swim ashore; and
he had been drowned in the attempt if a boat had not seasonably taken him
up. It was by computation a minute or two after the young woman's
discourse of the drowning that the young man took to the water." This
account, if taken literally, reveals her prescience of a definite
approximating event, also knowledge of the person whom it threatened, the
place where it would act, while neither outward perceptions nor any
embodied mortals could help her to such knowledge. It is not stated that
either the outer or inner set of her perceptive organs directly sensed
danger tending towards the young man. The report of her words is that "the
specters threatened the drowning;" from this it seemingly follows that her
inner sense, either of hearing or of vision, learned either the intention
of spirit beings to purposely expose a particular man to danger, or they
saw the oncoming of danger to him, and spoke of it to her.
This occurrence through the impressible girl was left unnoticed by Calef;
his silence approximates to concession that the main facts here stated
were not refutable in his day.
"Once," continues the narrator, "her tormentors pulled her up to the
ceiling of the chamber, and held her there, before a very numerous company
of spectators, who found it as much as they could all do to pull her down
again." That statement is distinct and needs no comment here, but may
receive further notice when we shall adduce the attestation of other
personal witnesses to its actual truth.
Again Mather says, "The enchanted people have talked much of a _white_
spirit from whence they have received marvelous assistances, ... by such a
spirit was Margaret Rule now visited. She says she never could see his
face, but that she had a frequent view of his bright, shining, and
glorious garments; he stood by her bedside continually heartening and
comforting her, and counseling her to maintain her faith and hope in
God.... He told her that God had permitted her afflictions to befall her
for the everlasting and unspeakable good of her own soul, and for the good
of many others." Hers was very strange experience to outflow from
_delirium tremens_. It seems to us very much more like inflowings of
heavenly peace from vision of the blessed. Obviously at times there
flashed forth glorious brightness during witchcraft's dismal night.
Mather stated these and some other very significant facts, which Calef
omitted to grapple with or to gainsay in his version of the scenes.
Omitting to extract more from Mather, we will now look at Calef's account.
He commences a letter to Mather in which, referring to his own previous
production, he says, "having written '_from the mouths of several
persons_,' who affirm they were present with Margaret Rule the 13th
instant, her answers, behavior, &c." Calef therefore probably was not
himself a witness of the scenes he described; but received his account
from the mouths of several other persons. One of them apparently wrote,
and Calef, adopting the statement, says, "I found her of a healthy
countenance, about seventeen years old, lying very still and speaking but
very little." Soon the Mathers (father and son, Increase and Cotton) came
in. The son shortly began to question Margaret and get replies. Their
colloquy was commonplace mostly, and need not be quoted; but some things
then _done_ we shall notice.
Margaret went into a fit, and Cotton Mather "laid his hand upon her face
and nose, but, as he said, without perceiving any breath. Then he brushed
her on the face with his glove, and rubbed her stomach, and bid others do
so too, and said it eased her; then she revived." Shortly again she "was
in a fit," and was again rubbed. "Margaret Perd, an attendant, assisted
Mather in rubbing her. The afflicted spake angrily to her, saying, 'Don't
you meddle with me,' and hastily put away her hand. He then wrought his
fingers before her eyes."
Such things, presumably, were stated correctly as matters of fact
observed. Were these doings by Mather foolish and useless? Different
persons will answer variously. In the eyes of most New England people
to-day, they may seem to be so. In part they appear to us ill judged and
harmful, though well meant and partially productive of the effect desired.
When Mather could perceive no breath, he naturally became solicitous to
set her lungs in motion, and by his rubbings probably soon accomplished
that. The observations of many moderns have taught them to welcome, at
times, stoppage of the external breathings of good mediums, deeming that
indicative of free, but imperceptible, breathing by the inner lungs, which
process sustains the person physically, while the spirit roams and
recreates in spirit-land. Yes, to _welcome_ it, as watchers by the
restless sick welcome the advent of sleep to the sufferers. Once we
probably should have acted, in like circumstances, much as Mather did; but
now we might often leave such a patient unacted upon for a time, even
though breathless to our external perception, because of belief that
action like Mather's might be as unwise as would the awakening of a sick
one immediately after the commencement of a nap. His motions of the
fingers around her eyes might tend to produce the same effect; that is, to
draw her out of a state of _rest_ and joy, provided the outer breathing
was imperceptible. Rubbings and motions of the hands, however, are often
very serviceable in removing influences which are distressing, whenever
the entranced one is conscious externally, as Margaret probably was in the
_second_ fit, but perhaps not in the first. For in the second she detected
difference between influences upon her from Mather and those from Miss
Perd; the former were agreeable and welcome, the latter annoying and
offensive. Systems sensitive enough to detect the qualities and influences
of magnetic emanations from all human beings, yes, all animals and most
minerals, that come in contact with themselves, are greatly soothed by
absorption of unconscious properties from some, and irritated by those
from others, though their esteem, respect, or affection for each class be
the same. Qualities of emanations are, to considerable extent, independent
of either intellectual, moral, or emotional states. A babe or simpleton
may be the best of anodynes, while the cultured saint may be an irritant
to a sensitive medium.
"He put his hand on the clothes over her breast, and said he felt a living
thing." Perhaps he did. In our day we hear of such presentations as
semblances of small living animals around mediums; but personally, have
not seen or felt such.
"Soon after they" (the ministers) "were gone, the afflicted desired the
_women_ to be gone, saying that the company of the _men_ was not
offensive to her." There is not general popular knowledge, that the
magnetisms of all animals are as distinctly male in one sex and female in
the other, as are any of their organs, nor that to very sensitive persons
there come times and states when their own magnetisms hunger for food from
magnetisms of opposite genders. Some sensitives feel the action of finer
laws and forces than men detect in their normal condition.
"She learned that there were reports about town that she was not
afflicted. And some came to her as spies; but during the said time" (of
their visit) "she had no fit." Few anti-spiritualistic asseverations are
more frequently put forth than this; that manifestations rarely occur in
the presence of certain persons deemed specially competent to detect fraud
and imposture, and who visit mediums for the purpose of exposing them.
Unbelief was once a bar to manifestation of many marvels by Jesus of
Nazareth. Also it much obstructs their presentation to-day; and probably,
therefore, might have done so when emanating from spies and would-be
exposers around Margaret Rule. But "they can't," is perhaps often said of
spirits when "they won't," would more accurately describe the fact. As at
the Albion in 1857, they would manifest before press reporters, but not
before Harvard professors. They know the thoughts of each observer, and
are often pleased to bite the biter; the playfully roguish sometimes find
it fun to catch rogues. "She had no fit" when spies were present.
"The attendants," September 19, "said that Mr. M. would not go to prayer
with her when people were in the room, as they" (he and his father) "did
that night he felt the _live creature_." Peter of old knew what was
conducive to effectual prayer when, at the side of Dorcas, then entranced
to seeming death, he "put the bystanders all forth and kneeled down and
prayed." Mather no doubt had acquired similar knowledge; world-wide
experience and observation teach that quiet and harmony are needful to the
utterance of satisfactory or very helpful prayer.
"Margaret Perd and another said they smelt brimstone. I and others," said
Calef's informant, "_said_ we did not smell any." The wording leaves it
doubtful, perhaps, whether the reporter and his "others," though smelling
brimstone, quizzically said they did _not_, or whether they actually
failed to smell it. If they did not smell the article, their natural,
frank statement would have been, _we did not_. But the wording is, "_we
said_" we did not. Our quotation was not made, however, for the purpose of
making such criticism, but as a text to the following paragraph.
Spirits sometimes have power to produce in the olfactory nerves of many
persons, precisely the sensations which many familiar odors produce. We
have personally been refreshed on several occasions by perception of the
fragrance of pinks, while we were reclining drowsily on a couch in our own
study, no visible person present with us, and no pinks in the vicinity, or
in our thoughts. This has occurred quite as often in dead of winter, as
when the garden was odorous with flowers. Probably such presentations may
be made to some members of a company, while others in the crowd will be
insensible to them. One's non-perception of spirit-born odor, whether
coming from above or below, whether pleasurable or offensive, does not
argue that mere fancy alone acts upon a neighbor who says he smells such.
On the evening of the 13th some one present, seemingly unacquainted with
her habits, put either to a particular person or to the whole company,
this question. "What does she eat or drink?" And, from some unnamed
source, came this response: "She does not eat at all, but drinks _rum_."
Neither the question nor the answer is ascribed to Mather, nor to any one
in particular.
We are surprised that S. P. Fowler, the intelligent, just, and charitable
editor of Salem Witchcraft, said in a foot note, page 57, that "the
affliction of Margaret Rule ... was nothing more than a bad case of
_delirium tremens_;" statements indicative of her good morals and habits
previous to her affliction were right before his editorial eyes on pages
just preceding his note, and nothing is found to her disparagement
excepting that annunciation by some unknown body that she drinks _rum_.
Statements in her favor, and absence of any against her in the original
records, convince us that Fowler's conclusion was rash and not well
founded. Mather says that "she was born of sober and honest parents;" also
that it "is affirmed that for about half a year before her visitation she
was observably _improved in the hopeful symptoms of a new creature_: she
was become seriously concerned for the everlasting salvation of her soul,
and _careful to avoid the snares of evil company_." Habits of that kind,
during six preceding months, were not probable antecedents to _delirium
tremens_; Calef's temptations to have charged bad character for
temperance, had there been facts to sustain him, were probably very
strong; but we have found no evidence that he did so. An informant of his,
when reporting conversation which took place around her, furnished the
question and response, viz.: "What does she eat or drink? Answer. She does
not eat at all, but drinks _rum_." A fact stated by Mather himself
naturally might tempt any wag, inclined to create mirth, to say playfully,
"She eats nothing, but drinks _rum_." He, Mather, informs us that "once,
twice, or so" her "controllers, for her annoyance or distress," allowed
her to take a _spoonful_ of rum. What more common than for attendants to
offer and urge upon a suffering and agonized person any stimulant or
cordial at hand? Nothing. We will allow that Margaret did take "once,
twice, or so" a spoonful of rum; but nothing else that we meet with in the
account of her, gives the shadow of foundation for the charge of _delirium
tremens_. If the charge is true, _delirium tremens_ in that case worked
wonders which it is not accustomed to perform; to tell correctly, when
lying on a bed on shore at night, that danger of drowning was then about
coming upon a particular young man away down the harbor, was an
extraordinary operation for that disease to perform; and still more
extraordinary was it, that such disease lifted the body on which it was
feeding, up in horizontal position to the ceiling overhead, held it there
for minutes, and so firmly that it took several men to pull it down. Do
such feats bespeak their origin in _delirium tremens_? No. Calling it a
case of _delirium tremens_ does nothing toward giving rational explanation
of the marvels attendant upon Margaret. _Rum_ is the name of a very
unsafe guide, and the name, not the thing, deluded the annotator to
inferences useless, entirely useless, as helps to explain such phenomena
as he was engaged in elucidating.
Any weakness, sin, or crime which was not charged upon Margaret Rule by
her cotemporaries, it is uncharitable to allege unqualifiedly against her
now, on the sole basis that in her hours of suffering she drank a few
spoonfuls of rum; and is especially inapropos, when, as is the case here,
the charge gives no help toward accomplishing the very purpose for which
alone it should have been made, namely, as an elucidation of the cause of
such things as how she sensed the danger threatening the absent man, and
how or by whom she was lifted up and sustained.
We shall quote no further from the statements of the two parties, Mather
and Calef, made prior to their coming into distinct conflict. Enough has
been presented to show that Mather stated several facts which, to the mass
of men, must seem astounding--such facts as bespeak performances beyond
what embodied men could enact. The wondrous facts, such as her prophecy of
danger about to wait upon the impressed sailor--her long fast without
pining--her being lifted by invisible force to the ceiling above her, &c.,
constitute the important parts of Mather's narrative of what he personally
witnessed and knew. On the other side, Calef, adopting the account of
unnamed witnesses, omits any allusion to the important facts in the case,
and presents, in the main, different, and relatively, if not absolutely,
trifling accompaniments. Calef was complained of by Mather for
_omissions_. To this Calef replied, "My intelligence not giving me any
further, I could not insert that I knew not." The doings of the Mathers,
and especially of Cotton, much more than the manifestations through and
upon Margaret, were detailed to Calef, and caused him to put forth a very
meager and one-sided manuscript account of this case. The clergyman at
once perceived and felt this, and soon sent his opponent the following
affidavits:--
"I do testify that I have seen Margaret Rule in her afflictions from
the invisible world, lifted up from her bed, wholly by an invisible
force, a great way toward the top of the room where she lay. In her
being so lifted she had no assistance from any use of her own arms or
hands or any other part of her body, not so much as her heels touching
her bed, or resting on any support whatsoever. And I have seen her
thus lifted, when not only a strong person hath thrown his whole
weight across her to pull her down, but several other persons have
endeavored with all their might to hinder her from being so raised up;
which I suppose that several others will testify as well as myself
when called unto it.
"Witness my hand,
"SAMUEL AVIS."
To the substance of the above, Robert Earle, John Wilkins, and Daniel
Wilkins did subscribe that they could testify. Also Thomas Thornton and
William Hudson testified to having seen Margaret so lifted up "by an
invisible force ... as to touch the garret floor, while yet neither her
feet nor any other part of her body rested either on the bed or on any
other support, ... and all this for a considerable while; we judged it
several minutes."--p. 76.
Before presenting the merchant's comments upon such statements of such
facts, we will name again the special reason why we draw protracted
attention to the two writers, Mather and Calef. They were intelligent and
alert cotemporaries, both in the vigor of manhood probably, for Mather was
about thirty years of age, and Calef lived more than twenty-five years
after the commencement of his controversy; both probably were cognizant of
the main facts pertaining to witchcraft; even during or very shortly after
their occurrence in the family of John Goodwin of Boston in 1688, in Salem
1692, and around both Mercy Short and Margaret Rule in Boston 1693.
Therefore the controversial writings of these two, both well acquainted
with the occurring witchcraft events of their day, but differing
distinctly on many points of belief and policy, become, when used in
connection, our best accessible source for learning what actually occurred
in many witchcraft scenes, what beliefs were prevalent then, what kinds of
evidence for convicting of witchcraft were admissible, and what rules
governed the courts. Because of their value as teachers upon witchcraft,
we desire to have these two men, with their agreements and differings,
clearly comprehended.
The merchant sent to the clergyman the following comment upon the chief
point confirmed by the affidavits of five or six unimpeached witnesses,
viz., the lifting of the girl to the top of the room by invisible power:--
"I suppose you expect I should believe it, and if so, the only advantage
gained is, that what has so long been controverted between Protestants
and Papists, _whether miracles are ceast_, will hereby seem to be decided
for the latter; it being, for aught I can see, if so, as true a _miracle_
as for iron to swim; and the devil can work such miracles."
A statement either more aspersive of its author's own candor, or more
indicative of his thralldom to prejudice, has rarely been made. Either
Calef or some one for him, when treating of the departure of the community
from scriptural interpretation and treatment of witchcraft, when scanning
rules laid down by accredited authors for its detection, and, generally,
when handling creeds, broad principles, and prevalent usages, wielded a
clear, pointed, and forceful pen. But Mather's facts blunted its point and
baffled its powers. Look at their metamorphosis of the logician; he says,
essentially, to his opponent, "If your facts are true, Catholics have the
better of us in our controversy with them as to the continuance of
miracles down to the present day. Your facts, if facts, are miracles, and
we Protestants are wrong. Therefore I will not concede them: if true, they
are "as great a miracle as for iron to swim," and prove the Catholics
right. I won't grant them."
What miracle did he concede that the devil can work? Was it causing iron
to swim? or was it such lifting of Margaret Rule as had been sworn to?
Perhaps we are mistaken, but we think he meant to say that the devil could
lift the girl as described; who, if he had done so, wrought as great a
miracle as God did when he caused the ax-head to swim where the prophet
cast a stick over it. Still such an operation in modern times must not be
avowed, because that would give the Catholic advantage over the
Protestant! Alas for the clear-headed man when facts force him to abandon
the methods of logic, and resort to those of prejudice! Mather's facts
completely stultified Calef in this case.
We cannot doubt--and who will venture to?--that he must have known the
characters for truth and veracity of Avis and his associate witnesses;
must have known the circumstances surrounding, and the state of the public
mind in regard to them; and yet we notice no indication that he attempted
to impeach any of them even in thought. He leaves them entirely unnoticed.
Yes, where even a very slight intimation or covert innuendo in some turn
of expression pointing at either credulity or mental weakness on their
part would have been an argument in favor of his views, nothing of the
kind appears in his writings. He leaves them without
characterization--leaves them unnamed. And since he who obviously must
have known them, and known too how they were generally esteemed, left
their veracity and competency entirely unimpeached, when impeachment would
have been his natural resort, if justifiable,--only blinding, rash, very
rash, prejudice will prompt any one at this day to doubt their fair claim
to be regarded as truthful and competent witnesses. Mather had said that
"once her tormentors pulled her up to the ceiling of the chamber, and held
her there before a numerous company of spectators, who found it as much as
they could all do to pull her down again." Such was the published
statement of a learned and able man, much respected by a large portion of
the inhabitants of Boston, and whose incredulity was not strong enough to
make him distrust the distinct testimony of his own senses. Therefore,
though backed by the testimony of six other witnesses, he is deemed so
credulous by many moderns that his word has little weight with them.
Calef's comments upon the case are jumbled, and not such that we can place
much confidence in the accuracy of our own perception of his meaning; but
he seems to have conceded that the devil possessed power enough to have
lifted the girl, and leaves us privileged to infer his belief in its
possible exercise upon her. That generally clear-headed man's illogical
and confused statement is not the least among marvels attendant upon
witchcraft. He murdered logic when attempting to parry the force of facts
sworn to.
He did not impeach the witnesses. Omission to do that, under the
circumstances, argues more convincingly to us, in favor of the literal and
exact truth of the statement by Mather and six others, that the girl was
raised from her bed by invisible powers up to the ceiling at the top of
the room, than would Calef's own distinct assent to what they affirmed. He
was no _timid_ advocate, and since a man as strong and brave as he,
circumstanced as he was, omitted attempt to discredit either the character
or competency of Mather's backers, the presumption is, that Calef's own
sense of justice and the judgment of the town regarded them as
unimpeachable. The girl was lifted, as they affirmed. What they stated is
credible.
We, personally, possess lack of incredulity rivalling that of Mather. For,
when our own senses testify to us calmly and deliberately, under
circumstances which exclude both illusion and delusion, we are accustomed
to repose very much confidence in the truth and accuracy of what they
say; and, in illustration of our lack of incredulity regarding what our
own senses witness, or, if one prefers different phraseology, in
illustration of our credulity, that is, of our ability and willingness to
believe what is thus learned, we give the following account of one of our
own interesting and instructive experiences:--
Several years ago, from fifteen to twenty, in a chamber of the residence
of Daniel Farrar, Esq., Hancock Street, Boston, to which he had invited us
and several others, we clasped the left hand of Rollin H. Squires in our
own right, took position with him in the center of a large room, several
feet distant from any other person or any article of furniture, when,
promptly upon shutting off the gas-light, his hand began to draw ours up,
gently and steadily, till our own right arm, its hand clasping his, was
extended to its full length above our head. Then we moved our left hand
across our chest, and it came in contact with the young man's boot at rest
by our side, and simultaneously we heard a scratch upon the ceiling above,
which was at least ten feet from the floor of the room. Soon he began to
descend as gently as he had ascended, and when he had reached the floor
and light had been let on, we saw a red chalk-mark at least three feet
long on the ceiling over the spot on which we had stood up together. The
mark was not there previous to the extinguishment of the light, for the
whole company present had been informed that he would have chalk in his
hand in order that he might give evidence to all present that he had been
lifted up. Consequently all of us carefully observed the overhead ceiling
up to the extinguishment of the light.
No reluctance attends our publishing such a narrative; we are less
solicitous to win a skeptic's laurels, than to make distinct statement of
any facts pertaining to occult forces in nature, which we have
experimentally learned. O, credulity! Thou art a most beneficent helper to
knowledge of nature's finer laws and forces, especially of those
relatively occult ones which evolve mysteries and exert unrecognized
action upon man; laws and forces which it would benefit him to comprehend
and regard.
Scarcely can history or experience furnish a more striking instance of the
stultifying and bewildering influence of marvelous _facts_ upon a bright,
resolute, philanthropic man, who was kept by his creeds and prejudices
from liberty and ability to let reason and logic have fair play, than was
witnessed in the case of Calef. Facts are man's masters; rebellion against
them, or disregard of their demands, is sure to bring humiliation upon
him.
Calef, whether conscious of it or not, was in an humiliated mental
condition when his strong mind, without denying well-attested facts,
indicated an unwillingness to acknowledge belief of them, because doing so
would settle a long-controverted question adversely to the party which
included himself. Seemingly nonplused and bewildered by facts, he said, in
quasi-concession of their occurrence, "The devil can work such miracles."
Both what Calef said, and what he omitted to say, tend forcibly to produce
conviction that Samuel Avis and his five associate witnesses stated
"truth, and nothing but the truth." Words or statements from men whose
characters were not impeached by a contesting cotemporary, ought to be
accepted as true by those who now can know nothing against the
truthfulness of lips from which they issued.
Had Calef's mind embraced perception that those whom he and nearly all
others then deemed the great devil, and smaller ones,--heaven-born, but
fallen,--were in fact what all clairvoyants, then and in all subsequent
days, have said they resembled,--and what they claimed to be,--that is,
men and women originally earth-born, and then earth-emancipated spirits,
requiring no more special permission from the Omnipotent One than man does
for using the forces of external nature,--could he have perceived that
such beings might be the performers of all the marvelous works of
witchcraft, he would have become free to admit possible solidity in some
Catholic ground; free to have set at least one foot upon it, and having
done that, he could have dispensed with that heaven-born devil whom he
supposed God commissioned, but whom Mather believed man had to help God
commission before he could harass mankind; would have been free to do thus
because he then would have seen possibility that other, lesser, or less
formidable agents have power to work marvels, would have seen that such
could have lifted Margaret Rule, and thus made the words of those who
described their wonderful works credible, and exempted himself from attack
of Mather at points where the striker was greatest sufferer from the
blows.
When attacking some barbarous beliefs and customs of Christendom, Calef
was very successful, and became a very great public benefactor; but he
failed, if such was ever his design, to refute the positive occurrence of
such marvelous facts as Mather's descriptions set forth. The general
accuracy of the clergyman's allegations was not made questionable by the
merchant's writings, even though he did present the man himself in some
ludicrous aspects, and often attempted that, when more knowledge of spirit
forces and agents than he possessed would have taught him that future time
might smile at the smiler and the would-be provoker of smiles.