The Devil in Britain and America

‘Query 6. It is a thing impossible for any man or woman to judge rightly on such marks, they are so neare to naturall excressencies, and they that finde them, durst not presently give Oath they were drawne by evill spirits, till they have used unlawfull courses of torture to make them say anything for ease and quiet, as who would not do? but I would know the reasons he speakes of, and whereby to discover the one from the other, and so be satisfied in that.

‘Answer. The reasons, in breefe, are three, which, for the present, he judgeth to differ from naturall marks; which are

‘1. He judgeth by the unusualnes of the place where he findeth the teats in or on their bodies, being farre distant from any usuall place, from whence such naturall markes proceed; as, if a witch plead the markes found are Emerods, if I finde them on the back bone, shall I assent with him? Knowing they are not neere that veine, and so, others, by child-bearing, when it may be, they are in the contrary part?

‘2. They are most commonly insensible, and feele neither pin, needle, aule, &c., thrust through them.

‘3. The often variations and mutations of these marks into severall formes, confirmes this matter; as, if a Witch hear a month or two before that the Witch-finder, (as they call him) is comming, they will, and have, put out their Imps to others to suckle them, even to their owne young and tender children; these upon search are found to have dry skinnes and filmes only, and be close to the flesh. Keepe her 24 houres with a diligent eye, that none of her Spirits come in any visible shape to suck her; the women have seen, the next day after, her Teats extended to their former filling strength, full of corruption, ready to burst; and, leaving her alone then one quarter of an houre, and let the women go up againe, and shee will have them drawn, by her Imps, close againe: Probatum est.’

This seems hard enough upon the poor friendless witch, but it is nothing to what Scot writes on the subject, giving his authorities, which, at the time he wrote, on behalf of the witch, was good law. As it is a very curious bit of history, and one, as far as I know, that has never been reproduced, I make a long extract bearing thereon:

‘Excommunicat persons, partakers of the salt, infants, wicked servants, and runawaies are to be admitted to beare witness against their dames in the mater of witchcraft, bicause, (saith Bodin, the champion of witch mongers) none that be honest are able to detect them. Heretikes, also, and witches shall be received to accuse, but not to excuse a witch. And, finallie, the testimonie of all infamous persons in this case is good and allowed. Yea, one lewd person, (saith Bodin) may be received to accuse and condemne a thousand suspected witches. And although by lawe, a capitall enimie may be challenged; yet James Sprenger and Henry Justitor (from whom Bodin, and all the writers that euer I haue read, doo receiue their light, authorities and arguments) saie, (upon this point of lawe) that The poore frendlesse old woman must proue that hir capitall enemie would haue killed hir, and that hee hath both assalted and wounded hir; otherwise she pleadeth all in vaine. If the iudge aske hir, whether she haue anie capitall enemies; and she rehearse other, and forget her accuser, or else answer that he was hir capitall enemie, but now she hopeth that he is not so; such a one is neuertheles admitted for a witnes. And though by law, single witnesses are not admittable; yet, if one depose she hath witched hir cow, another hir sow; and the third hir butter; these saith, are no single Witnesses bicause they agree that she is a witch.

‘Women suspected to be witches, after their apprehension may not be suffered to go home, or to other places, to seek suerties; for feare least at their returne home, they worke reuenge upon them. In which respect Bodin commendeth much the Scottish custome and order in this behalfe; where, (he saith) a hollowe piece of wood, or a chest is placed in the church, into the which anie bodie may freelie cast a little scroll of paper, wherein may be conteined the name of the witch, the time, place and fact &c. And the same chest being locked by three inquisitors or officers appointed for that purpose; which keepe three seuerall kaies. And then the accuser need not be knowne, nor shamed with the reproch of slander or malice to his poore neighbour.

‘Item. there must be great persuasions used to all men, women and children, to accuse old women of witchcraft.

‘Item. there may alwaies be promised impunitie and fauour to witches that confesse and detect others; and for the contrairie, there may be threatnings and violence practised and used.

‘Item. the little children of witches, which will not confesse, must be attached; who (if they be craftilie handled saith Bodin) will confesse against their owne mothers.

‘Item. witches must be examined as suddenlie, and as unawares as is possible; the which will so amaze them, that they will confesse anything, supposing the diuell hath forsaken them; whereas, if they should first be committed to prison, the diuell would tamper with them, and informe them what to doo.

‘Item. the inquisitor, iudge, or examiner, must begin with small matters first.

‘Item. they must be examined whether their parents were witches or no; for witches (as these Doctors suppose) came by propagation. And Bodin setteth downe this principle in witchcraft, to wit, Si saga sit mater, sic etiam est filia: howbeit the lawe forbiddeth it Ob sanguinis reuerentiam.

‘Item. the examiner must looke stedfastlie upon their eies: for they cannot looke directlie upon a man’s face, (as Bodin affirmeth in one place, although in another he saith, that they kill and destroie both men and beasts by their lookes).

‘Item. she must be examined of all accusations, presumptions and faults, at one instant: least sathan should afterwards dissuade hir from confession.

‘Item. a witch may not be put in prison alone, least the diuell dissuade her from confession, through promises of her indemnitie. For (saith Bodin) some that haue been in the gaole haue proued to flie awaie, as they were woont to doo when they met with Diana and Minerua &c., and so brake their owne necks against the stone walles.

‘Item. if anie denie hir owne confession made without torture, she is neuerthelesse by that confession to be condemned, as in anie other crime.

‘Item, the iudges must seeme to put on a pittifull countenance and to moue them; saieing that It was not they, but the diuell that committed the murther, and that he compelled them to doo it; and must make them beleeue that they think them to be innocents.

‘Item. if they will not confesse nothing upon the racke or torture; their apparell must be changed, and euerie haire in their bodie must be shauen off with a sharpe razor.

‘Item, if they have charmes for taciturnitie, so as they feele not the common tortures, and therefore confesse nothing; then some sharpe instrument must be thrust betwixt euerie naile of their fingers and toes; which (as Bodin saith) was King Childebert’s devise, and is, to this daie, of all others the most effectuall. For by meanes of that extreme paine, they will (saith he) confesse anie thing.

‘Item. Paulus Grillandus, being an old doer in these matters, wisheth that when witches sleepe, and feele no paine upon the torture, Domine labia mea aperies should be said, and so, (saith he) both the tormentt will be felt, and the truth will be uttered.

‘Item. Bodin saith, that at the time of examination there should be a semblance of a great a doo, to the terrifieing of the witch; and that a number of instruments, gieues,36 manacles, ropes, halters, fetters &c. be prepared, brought foorth, and laid before the examinate; and, also, that some be procured to make a most horrible and lamentable crie, in the place of torture, as though he or she were upon the racke, or in the tormentor’s hands: so as the examinate may heare it whiles she is examined, before she hir selfe be brought into the prison; and perhaps (saith he) she will by this meanes, confesse the matter.

‘Item. there must be subborned some craftie spie, that may seeme to be a prisoner with hir in the like case; who, perhaps, may, in Conference, undermine hir, and so bewraie and discouer hir.

‘Item. if she will not yet confesse, she must be told that she is detected, and accused by other of hir companions; although in truth there be no such matter; and so, perhaps, she will confesse, the rather to be reuenged upon hir aduersaries and accusers.

‘If an old woman threaten or touch one, being in health, who dieth shortly after; or else is infected with the leprosie, apoplexie, or anie strange disease; it is (saith Bodin) a permanent fact, and such an euidence, as condemnation or death must insue, without further proofe; if anie bodie haue mistrusted hir, or said before that she was a witch.

‘Item. if anie come in, or depart out, of the chamber or house, the doores being shut; it is an apparent and sufficient euidence to a Witches Condemnation, without further triall:

‘Item, if a woman bewitch anie bodies eies, she is to be executed without further proofe.

‘Item. if anie inchant or bewitch men’s beasts, or come, or flie in the aire, or make a dog speake, or cut off anie man’s members, and unite them againe to men or children’s bodies; it is sufficient proofe to condemnation.

‘Item. presumptions and coniectures are sufficient proofes against witches.

‘Item. if three witnesses doo but saie, Such a woman is a witch: then it is a cleere case that she is to be executed with death. Which matter Bodin saith is not onelie certeine by the canon and civill lawes, but by the opinion of pope Innocent, the wisest pope, (as he saith) that ever was.

‘Item. the complaint of anie one man of credit is sufficient to bring a poore woman to the racke or pullie.

‘Item. a condemned or infamous person’s testimonie is good and allowable in matters of witchcraft.

‘Item a witch is not to be deliuered, though she endure all the tortures, and confesse nothing; as all other are in anie criminall cases.

‘Item, though the depositions of manie women at one instant are disabled, as insufficient in lawe; bicause of the imbecillitie and frailtie of their nature or sex: yet, in this matter, one woman, though she be a partie, either accuser or accused, and be also infamous and impudent (for such are Bodin’s words) yea, and alreadie condemned; she may, neverthelesse serue to accuse and condemne a witch.

‘Item, a witness uncited, and offering himselfe in this case, is to be heard, and in none other.

‘Item, a Capitall enimie (if the enimitie be pretended to grow by meanes of witchcraft) may obiect against a witch; and none exception is to be had or made against him.

‘Item, although the proofe of periurie may put back a witnesse in other causes; yet in this, a periured person is a good and a lawfull witnesse.

‘Item, the proctors and advocates in this case are compelled to be witnesses against their clients, as in none other case they are to be constrained thereunto.

‘Item, none can giue euidence against witches, touching their assemblies, but witches onelie; bicause, (as Bodin saith) none other can do it.’

Thus we see that the poor witch had everything against her, which will account in a great way for those marvellous confessions we read of, when the poor, weary, baited and tortured woman would confess to anything to get a few hours’ respite from pain, well knowing that execution would follow, whether she confessed or no. In fact, no other hypothesis is possible, when we read of the extraordinary matters to which these poor women confessed.

CHAPTER XIV

Legislation against Witches – Punishment – Last Executions for Witchcraft – Inability to weep and sink – Modern Cases of Witchcraft

There has not been much legislation against witches in England, the Acts simply keeping in force. It is said that Athelstane in 928 made witchcraft a capital crime, but our ‘statutes at large’ give 33 Henry VIII., cap. 8 (1541), as the first Act really touching witchcraft, as coming within the ken of this book. Next comes 5 Elizabeth, cap. 16 (1562), and then 1 James I., cap. 12 (1604), previously substantially quoted. This was the law of the land until it was abolished in 1736, 9 George II., cap. 5, which did away with capital punishment for witchcraft, and the present law on the subject dates from 1822, 3 George IV., where the word ‘witchcraft’ certainly disappears, and only ‘All Persons pretending to be Gipsies: all Persons pretending to tell Fortunes, or using any subtle Craft, Means, or Device, by Palmistry, or other wise, to deceive or impose upon any of His Majestys subjects,’ shall be adjudged ‘Common Rogues and Vagabonds,’ and sentenced as such.

Formerly the poor wretches were burned, a fearful fate, as Scot says, quoting Bodin. ‘Item, if a woman confesse freelie herein, before question37 be made; and yet afterward denie it; she is neuerthelesse to be burned.’ Possibly the last case of burning for witchcraft is one I shall record later on, at Bury St. Edmunds, in 1644; but the same year one Alice Hudson was burned at York for receiving small sums of money from the Devil.38

The last case of burning in Scotland was in Sutherland, in 1722, and the last in Ireland at Glarus, a servant being burnt as a witch in 1786. Probably the last burning for witchcraft, in any so-called civilized country, is the following, taken from the Steamer Edition of the Panama Star and Herald of June 5, 1871: ‘According to the Porvenir of Callao (Peru), 29th ult., a woman has been burnt in the public square of a town in the province of Guavina, about thirty-four leagues from the port of Iquique, for being a witch. This punishment, worthy of the flourishing days of the Spanish Inquisition, was ordered by the Lieutenant-Governor and Judge of the Province.’

Hutchinson, a very careful writer, whose ‘Historical Essay concerning Witchcraft,’ etc., was first published in 1718, and the second edition in 1720, says, referring to a case we shall hear of anon: ‘Susan Edwards, Mary Trembles, and Temperance Lloyd, hanged at Exeter, confess’d themselves Witches, but died with good Prayers in their Mouths. I suppose these are the last Three that have been hanged in England. 1682.’

James I. was ruthless against witches, vide the following:

‘Philomathes. Then to make an ende of our conference, since I see it drawes late, what forme of punishment thinke yee merites these Magicians and Witches? For I see that yee account them to be al alike guiltie.

Epistemon. They ought to be put to death according to the Law of God, the civill and imperiall Law, and municipall Law of all Christian nations.

Phi. But what kinde of death, I pray you?

Epi. It is commonly used by fire, but that is an indifferent thing to be used in every countrey, according to the Law or custome thereof.

Phi. But ought no sexe, age, nor ranke to bee exempted?

Epi. None at al (being so used by the lawful magistrate) for it is the highest point of Idolatry, wherein no exception is admitted by the Law of God.

Phi. Then bairnes may not be spared?

Epi. Yea, not a haire the lesse of my conclusion. For they are not that capable of reason as to practise such things.’

Before quitting the subject of witches for cases of witchcraft, it occurs to me that I have omitted one or two peculiarities relating to them. First of all, one personal peculiarity they had, according to the infallible authority Bodin – an inability to weep, or, at all events, they could only screw out three tears. And this was a great test, so much so that a form of conjuration is given in the ‘Malleus Maleficarum,’ and translated by Scot, which bears strongly upon this point: ‘I coniure thee by the amorous teares, which Jesus Christ our Saviour shed upon the crosse for the saluation of the world; and by the most earnest and burning teares of his mother the most glorious virgine Marie, sprinkled upon his wounds late in the euening; and by all the teares which euerie saint and elect vessell of God hath poured out heere in the world, and from whose eies he hath wiped away all teares; that, if thou be without fault, thou maist poure downe teares abundantlie; and, if thou be guiltie, that thou weepe in no wise: In the name of the father, of the sonne, and of the holie ghost: Amen. And note (saith he) that the more you coniure, the lesse she wepeth.’

But the same authority says: ‘She must be well looked unto, otherwise she will put spettle priuilie upon hir cheeks, and seeme to weepe.’ King James says, ‘Not so much as their eies are able to shead teares, (threaten and torture them as yee please) … albeit the women kinde especially, be able otherwaies to shead teares at every light occasion when they will, yea, although it were dissemblingly like the Crocodiles.’

He also says, with reference to their inability to sink in water: ‘It appeares that God hath appointed (for a supernatural signe of the monstrous impiety of Witches) that the water shall refuse to receive them in her bosome, that have shaken off them the sacred Water of Baptisme, and wilfully refused the benefite thereof.’

This ordeal by water has been practised to a very late date, and ‘swimming her for a witch’ has been often heard in this century. The scientific and proper method of preparing the witch is by tying her right thumb to her left great toe, and vice versâ, and this ordeal had this simplicity: If the putative witch sank well, she was innocent; and if she swam, she could either be ducked and ill treated till she died, as too often was the case, or she was ipso facto a confessed witch.

Another ordeal was, to take a piece of the thatch from off the reputed witch’s cottage, and set fire to it; if she came to the person so burning the thatch, her witchcraft was incontestable.

Another was, to weigh the witch against the church Bible, and this test, too, has come down to modern times. One instance will suffice. ‘One Susana Hannokes, an elderly woman of Wingrove, near Aylesbury, was accused by a neighbour for bewitching her spinning wheel, so that she could not make it go round, and offered to make oath of it before a magistrate; on which, the husband, in order to justify his wife, insisted upon her being tried by the church Bible, and that the accuser should be present: accordingly, she was conducted to the parish church, where she was stript of all her cloathes to her shift and under-coat, and weighed against the Bible; when, to the no small mortification of her accuser, she out-weighed it, and was honourably acquitted of the charge.’39

But in this nineteenth century of ours, with all its boasted civilization, witchcraft is still believed in in England, as the following two or three instances will testify:

S. A. S., writing in Notes and Queries, June 25, 1853, says, ‘A cottager, who does not live five minutes’ walk from my house, found his pig seized with a strange and unaccountable disorder. He, being a sensible man, instead of asking the advice of a veterinary surgeon, immediately went to the white witch (a gentleman who drives a flourishing trade in this neighbourhood). He received his directions, and went home, and implicitly followed them. In perfect silence, he went to the pigsty; and, lancing each foot and both ears of the pig, he allowed the blood to run into a piece of common dowlas. Then, taking two large pins, he pierced the dowlas in opposite directions; and, still keeping silence, entered his cottage, locked the door, placed the bloody rag upon the fire, heaped up some turf over it, and, reading a few verses of the Bible, waited till the dowlas was burned. As soon as this was done, he returned to the pigsty; found his pig perfectly restored to health, and, mirabile dictu! as the white witch had predicted, the old woman, who it was supposed had bewitched the pig, came to inquire after the pig’s health. The animal never suffered a day’s illness afterwards. My informant was the owner of the pig himself.

‘Perhaps, when I heard this story, there may have been a lurking expression of doubt upon my face, so that my friend thought it necessary to give me farther proof. Some time ago, a lane in this town began to be looked upon with a mysterious awe, for every evening a strange white rabbit would appear in it, and, running up and down, would mysteriously disappear. Dogs were frequently put on the scent, but all to no purpose, the white rabbit could not be caught; and rumours began to assert pretty confidently that the white rabbit was nothing more nor less than a witch. The man whose pig had been bewitched was all the more confident, as, every evening when the rabbit appeared, he had noticed the bedroom window of his old enemy’s window open! At last, a large party of bold-hearted men, one evening, were successful enough to find the white rabbit in a garden, the only egress from which is through a narrow passage between two cottages, all the rest of the garden being securely surrounded by brick walls.

‘They placed a strong guard in this entry, to let nothing pass, while the remainder advanced as skirmishers among the cabbages: one of these was successful, and caught the white rabbit by the ears, and, not without some trepidation, carried it towards the reserve in the entry. But, as he came nearer to his friends, his courage grew, and gradually, all the wrongs his poor pig had suffered took form and vigour in a powerful kick at the poor little rabbit. No sooner had he done this than, he cannot tell how, the rabbit was out of his grasp; the people in the entry saw it come, but could not stop it; through them all it went, and has never been seen again.

‘But now to the proof of the witchcraft. The old woman, whom all suspected, was laid up in her bed for three days afterwards, unable to walk about, all the consequence of the kick she had received in the shape of a white rabbit!’

CHAPTER XV

Commencement of Witchcraft in England – Dame Eleanor Cobham – Jane Shore – Lord Huntingford – Cases from the Calendars of State Papers – Earliest Printed Case, that of John Walsh – Elizabeth Stile – Three Witches tried at Chelmsford – Witches of St. Osyth – Witches of Warboys – Witches of Northamptonshire

At what date the higher cult of sorcery or magic became the drivel known as witchcraft is uncertain. I am almost inclined to place it (in England) at 1441; but then the charge was purely political, and I think that the Calendars of State Papers for nearly a century afterwards bear the statement out, that for some time afterwards they were so. The case of Dame Eleanor Cobham is very tersely told in ‘Baker’s Chronicle.’40

‘Whilst these Alterations passed in France, a more unnatural (sic) passed in England; the Uncle riseth against the Nephew, the Nephew against the Uncle; the Duke of Gloucester brings Articles against the Cardinal, charging him with affecting Preheminence, to the Derogation of the King’s Prerogative, and Contempt of his Laws; which Articles are delivered to the King, and by him to his Council, who, being most of the Clergy, durst not meddle in them, for fear of offending the Cardinal. On the other Side, the Cardinal, finding nothing whereof directly to accuse the Duke of Gloucester himself, accuseth his other self, the Lady Eleanor Cobham, the Duke’s Wife, of Treason for attempting, by Sorcery and Witchcraft, the Death of the King, and Advancement of her Husband to the Crown: For which, tho’ acquitted of the Treason, she is adjudged to open Penance, namely, to go with a Wax Taper in her hand, Hoodless (save through a Kerchief) through London, divers Days together, and after, to remain in perpetual imprisonment in the Isle of Man. The Crime objected against her was, procuring Thomas Southwel, John Hunne, Priests, Roger Bolingbroke, a supposed Necromancer, and Margery Jordan, called the Witch of Eye, in Suffolk, to devise a Picture of Wax in Proportion of the King, in such sort by Sorcery, that, as the Picture consumed, so the King’s body should consume: For which they were all condemned. The Witch was burnt at Smithfield, Bolingbroke was hanged, constantly affirming upon his Death, That neither the Duchess, nor any other from her, did ever require more of him, than only to know, by his Art, how long the King should live. John Hunne had his Pardon, and Southwel died the Night before he should have been executed.’