INTRODUCTION.

In May last I had occasion to consult the original manuscript of Gov.

Hutchinson’s second volume of the _History of Massachusetts_, which,

it is well known, is among the Hutchinson papers in the State archives

in Boston. I had never before seen the manuscript, and did not readily

find the passage of which I was in search. The first portion of the

manuscript seemed to be missing, and its place was supplied by matter

which belonged to the Appendix. My first impression was that the

missing sheets were those which Gov. Hutchinson did not recover after

the stamp-act riot of 1765. Finding the matter of the Appendix out of

place, suggested that the volume might have been carelessly arranged

for binding. On collating the manuscript the early portion was found in

another part of the volume. This was the copy used by the printers.

In my search I came to sheets which contained the subject matter

of the printed text, but expressed in different language. I saw,

on a closer examination, that this was an earlier draft, and the

identical manuscript which had passed the ordeal of the riot of 1765;

for portions of it were much defaced, and bore the marks of being

trampled in the mud. The copy from which the volume was printed was

evidently prepared at a later date. For the convenience of those who

may hereafter consult this manuscript, I made in folio 7 (following the

matter of the Appendix), the following memoranda:—

“There has been an error in binding this manuscript. The matter which

precedes this is Appendix No. 1 (printed pp. 449-481, edition 1767, and

pp. 404-423, edition 1795). The first portion of the history proper,

ending with manuscript page 28 (to printed p. 40, edition 1767, and

p. 43, edition 1795), has been placed in folios 92-100. Page 29 is

opposite. This is the manuscript from which the second volume was

printed.

“In folio 55 is the beginning of another manuscript, an earlier draft,

from which the author prepared the narrative which appears in the

printed volume. The earlier draft, ending in folio 91, carries the

substance of the narrative to the word “Boston,” on p. 313, edition of

1767, and p. 284, edition of 1795.

“These memoranda were made May 17, 1870 (with the approval of

Mr. Secretary Warner), at which time the earlier draft was first

identified.”

[SIGNED.]

Both manuscripts are wholly in the autograph of Gov. Hutchinson, and

they seem to be prepared with equal care. In form of expression and

phraseology they are quite unlike. Incidents and opinions contained in

the earlier draft are changed, abridged and sometimes omitted in the

later draft. In matters of fact the earlier draft is often more precise

and accurate than the printed text, for the author doubtless prepared

it with the original authorities before him.

The researches of Gov. Hutchinson into the early annals of

Massachusetts are of the highest historical value. He had opportunities

of access to original papers such as no person now possesses. He had

the tastes, the capacity for close application and research, the

judicial understanding and the freedom from prejudice and partizanship

which characterize the genuine historian. His style, if not always

elegant, is clear and simple, and singularly free from that sensational

and rhetorical method of statement which is the bane of much of the

historical writing of the present day.

Each of the several editions of Gov. Hutchinson’s _History of

Massachusetts_ has become rare, and a new and revised edition will

soon be demanded. In the preparation of that work the earlier draft of

the second volume, which has now come to light, will furnish important

materials. For the purpose of exhibiting the character and value of

this manuscript, and for contributing some additional information upon

a special subject, I have extracted for publication that portion which

treats the “Witchcraft Delusion of 1692.”

So far as a presentation of facts is concerned, no account of that

dreadful tragedy has appeared which is more accurate and truthful than

Gov. Hutchinson’s narrative. His theory on the subject—that it was

wholly the result of fraud and deception on the part of the “afflicted

children”—will not be generally accepted at the present day, and his

reasoning on this point will not be deemed conclusive. That there were

fraud and deception attending it, no one will doubt; but there is now

a tendency to trace an analogy between the phenomena then exhibited,

and modern spiritual manifestations. No man of any reputation who lived

in that generation, and saw what transpired at Salem Village and its

vicinity, doubted that there was some influence then exerted which

could not be explained by the known laws of matter or of mind. As these

men left the stage, the theory of fraud was gradually accepted by their

descendants; and at the period when Gov. Hutchinson wrote, it was well

nigh the universal belief among the educated classes.

For the information of persons interested in tracing the resemblance

between the abnormal manifestations of our time and those of the

seventeenth century, I have appended notes to the other cases mentioned

by Gov. Hutchinson, which may lead such inquirers to a further

knowledge of their psychological phenomena.

The author’s notes are indicated by stars, &c., and are signed H. The

editor’s notes are indicated by numerals, and are signed P.

The witchcraft delusion of 1692 · 第 9 / 87 题