All that could be done was to keep still, in the hope that he would become more malleable. In the meanwhile, public business called him away, perhaps to Rhode Island or Connecticut, from the eighteenth to the twenty-seventh of October. In his absence, whether in consequence of movements he had put in train, or solely from what had become known of his views, the circumstance occurred which is thus related in Sewall's Diary--the Legislature was then in Session: "OCT. 26, 1692. A Bill is sent in about calling a Fast and Convocation of Ministers, that may be led in the right way, as to the Witchcrafts. The season, and manner of doing it, is such, that the Court of Oyer and Terminer count themselves thereby dismissed. 29 nos & 33 yeas to the Bill. Capt. Bradstreet, and Lieut. True, Wm. Hutchins, and several other interested persons, in the affirmative."
The course of Nathaniel Saltonstall, of Haverhill, and the action in the Legislature of the persons here named, entitle the Merrimac towns of Essex-county to the credit of having made the first public and effectual resistance to the fanaticism and persecutions of 1692.
The passage of this Bill, in the House of Representatives, shows how the public mind had been changed, since the June Session. Dudley Bradstreet was a Magistrate and member from Andover, son of the old Governor, and, with his wife, had found safety from prosecution by flight; Henry True, a member from Salisbury, was son-in-law of Mary Bradbury, who had been condemned to death; Samuel Hutchins, (inadvertently called "Wm.," by Sewall) was a member from Haverhill, and connected by marriage with a family, three of whom were tried for their lives. Sewall says there were "several other" members of the House, interested in like manner. This shows into what high circles the accusers had struck.
It appears, by the same Diary, that on the twenty-seventh, Cotton Mather preached the Thursday Lecture, from _James_, i., 4. The day of trial was then upon him and his fellow-actors; and patience was inculcated as the duty of the hour.
The Diary relates that at a meeting of the Council, on the twenty-eighth, in the afternoon, Sewall, "desired to have the advice of the Governor and Council, as to the sitting of the Court of Oyer and Terminer, next week; said, should move it no more; great silence prevailed, as if should say, Do not go."
The entry does not state whether Phips was present; as, however, the time fixed for his recent brief absence had expired, probably he was in his seat. The following mishap, described by Sewall, as occurring that day, perhaps detained the Deputy-governor: "OCT. 28. Lt. Gov^r, coming over the causey, is, by reason of the high tide, so wet, that is fain to go to bed, till sends for dry clothes to Dorchester."
The "great silence" was significant of the embarrassment in which they were placed, and their awe of the "choler" of the Governor.
The Diary gives the following account of the Session the next day, at which, (as Sewall informs us,) the Lieutenant-governor was not present: "OCT. 29. Mr. Russel asked, whether the Court of Oyer and Terminer should sit, expressing some fear of inconvenience by its fall. Governor said, it must fall."
Thus died the Court of Oyer and Terminer. Its friends cherished, to the last, the hope that Sir William might be placated, and possibly again brought under control; but it vanished, when the emphatic and resolute words, reported by Sewall, were uttered.
The firmness and force of character of the Governor are worthy of all praise. Indeed, the illiterate and impulsive sailor has placed himself, in history, far in front of all the honored Judges and learned Divines, of his day. Not one of them penetrated the whole matter as he did, when his attention was fully turned to it, and his feelings enlisted, to decide, courageously and righteously, the question before him. He saw that no life was safe while the evidence of the "afflicted persons" was received, "either to the committing or trying" of any persons. He thus broke through the meshes which had bound Judges and Ministers, the writers of books and the makers of laws; and swept the whole fabric of "spectral testimony" away, whether as matter of "enquiry" and "presumption," or of "conviction." The ship-carpenter of the Kennebec laid the axe to the root of the tree.
The following extract from a letter of Sir William Phips, just put into my hands, and for which I am indebted to Mr. Goodell, substantiates the conclusions to which I have been led.
"_Governor Phips to the Lords of the Committee of Trade and Plantations, 3 April, 1693._
"MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS:
"I have intreated M^r Blathwayte to lay before your Lordships several letters, wherein I have given a particular account of my stopping a supposed witchcraft, which had proved fatall to many of their Maj^ties good subjects, had there not been a speedy end putt thereto; for a stop putt to the proceedings against such as were accused, hath caused the thing itself to cease."
This shows that, addressing officially his Home Government, he assumed the responsibility of having "stopped and put a speedy end to the proceedings;" that he had no great faith in the doctrines then received touching the reality of witchcraft; and that he was fully convinced that, if he had allowed the trials to go on, and the inflammation of the public mind to be kept up by "discourses," the bloody tragedy would have been prolonged, and "proved fatal to many good" people.
There are two men--neither of them belonging to the class of scholars or Divines; both of them guided by common sense, good feeling, and a courageous and resolute spirit--who stand alone, in the scenes of the witchcraft delusions. NATHANIEL SALTONSTALL, who left the Council and the Court, the day the Ministers' _Advice_, to go on with the prosecutions, was received, and never appeared again until that _Advice_ was abandoned and repudiated; and Sir WILLIAM PHIPS, who stamped it out beneath his feet.
But how with Cotton Mather's Book, the _Wonders of the Invisible World_?
On the eleventh of October, Stoughton and Sewall signed a paper, printed in the book, [_p. 88_] endorsing its contents, especially as to "matters of fact and evidence" and the "methods of conviction used in the proceedings of the Court at Salem." The certificate repeats the form of words, so often used in connection with the book, that it was written "at the direction of His Excellency the Governor," without, as in all cases, specifying who, whether Phips or Stoughton, was the Governor referred to. As all the Judges were near at hand, and as the certificate related to the proceedings before them, it is quite observable that only the two mentioned signed it. As they were present, in the private conference, with Cotton Mather, at the house of one of them, on the twenty-second of September, when its preparation for publication was finally arranged, they could not well avoid signing it. The times were critical; and the rest of the Judges, knowing the Governor's feelings, thought best not to appear. Of the three other persons, at that conference, Hathorne, it is true, was a Judge of that Court, but it is doubtful whether he often, or ever, took his seat as such; besides, he was too experienced and cautious a public man, unnecessarily to put his hand to such a paper, when it was known, as it was probably to him, that Sir William Phips had forbidden publications of the kind.
There is another curious document, in the _Wonders_--a letter from Stoughton to Mather, highly applauding the book, in which he acknowledges his particular obligations to him for writing it, as "more nearly and highly concerned" than others, considering his place in the Court, expressing in detail his sense of the great value of the work, "at this juncture of time," and concluding thus: "I do therefore make it my particular and earnest Request unto you, that, as soon as may be, you will commit the same unto the press, accordingly." It is signed, without any official title of distinction, simply "WILLIAM STOUGHTON," and is _without date_.
It is singular, if Phips was the person who requested it to be written and was the "Excellency" who authorized its publication, that it was left to William Stoughton to "request" its being put to press.
The foregoing examination of dates and facts seems, almost, to compel the conclusion, to be drawn also from his letter, that Sir William Phips really had nothing whatever to do with procuring the preparation or sanctioning the publication of the _Wonders of the Invisible World_.
The same is true as to the request to the Ministers, for their _Advice_, dated the fifteenth of June. It was "laid before the Judges;" and was, undoubtedly, a response to an application from them. Having, very improperly, it must be confessed, given the whole matter of the trials over to Stoughton, and being engrossed in other affairs, it is quite likely that he knew but little of what had been going on, until his return from the eastward, in October. And his frequent and long absences, leaving Stoughton, so much of the time, with all the functions and titles of Governor devolved upon him, led to speaking of the latter as "His Excellency." When bearing this title and acting as Governor, for the time being, the Chief-justice, with the side Judges--all of them members of the Council, and in number meeting the requirement in the Charter for a quorum, seven--may have been considered, as substantially, "The Governor and Council."
Thinking it more than probable that, in this way, great wrong has been done to the memory of an honest and noble-hearted man, I have endeavored to set things in their true light. The perplexities, party entanglements, personal collisions, and engrossing cares that absorbed the attention of Sir William Phips, during the brief remainder of his life, and the little interest he felt in such things, prevented his noticing the false position in which he had been placed by the undistinguishing use of titular phrases.
Judge Sewall's Diary contains an entry that, also, sheds light upon the position of the Mathers. It will be borne in mind, that Elisha Cook was the colleague of Increase Mather, as Colonial Agents in London. Cook refused assent to the new Charter, and became the leader of the anti-Mather party. He was considered an opponent of the witchcraft prosecutions, although out of the country at the time. "TUESDAY, NOV.
15, 1692. M^r Cook keeps a Day of Thanksgiving for his safe arrival."
* * * [_Many mentioned as there, among them Mr. Willard._] "Mr. Allen preached from Jacob's going to Bethel, * * * Mr. Mather not there, nor Mr. Cotton Mather. The good Lord unite us in his fear, and remove our animosities."
The manner in which Sewall distinguished the two Mathers confirms the views presented on pages 37, 38.
It may be remarked, that, up to this time, Sewall seems to have been in full sympathy with Stoughton and Mather. He was, however, beginning to indulge in conversations that indicate a desire to feel the ground he was treading. After a while, he became thoroughly convinced of his error; and there are scattered, in the margins of his Diary, expressions of much sensibility at the extent to which he had been misled. Over against an entry, giving an account of his presence at an Examination before Magistrates, of whom he was one, on the eleventh of April, 1692, at Salem, is the interjection, thrice repeated, "_Vae, Vae, Vae_." At the opening of the year 1692, he inserted, at a subsequent period, this passage: "_Attonitus tamen est, ingens discrimine parvo committi potuisse Nefas._"[4]
FOOTNOTES:
[4] For the privilege of inspecting and using Judge Sewall's Diary I am indebted to the kindness of the Massachusetts Historical Society: and I would also express my thanks, for similar favors and civilities, to the officers in charge of the Records and Archives in the Massachusetts State House, the Librarian of Harvard University, the Essex Institute, and many individuals, not mentioned in the text, especially those devoted collectors and lovers of our old New England literature, Samuel G. Drake and John K. Wiggin.
XIV.
COTTON MATHER'S WRITINGS SUBSEQUENT TO THE WITCHCRAFT PROSECUTIONS.
I propose, now, to enquire into the position Cotton Mather occupied, and the views he expressed, touching the matter, after the witchcraft prosecutions had ceased and the delusion been dispelled from the minds of other men.
During the Winter of 1692 and 1693, between one and two hundred prisoners, including confessing witches, remained in Jail, at Salem, Ipswich, and other places. A considerable number were in the Boston Jail. It seems, from the letter to Secretary Allyn of Connecticut, that, during that time, the Mathers were in communication with them, and receiving from them the names of persons whose spectres, they declared, they had seen and suffered from, as employed in the Devil's work. After all that had happened, and the order of Sir William Phips, forbidding attempts to renew the excitement, it is wonderful that the Mathers should continue such practices. In the latter part of the Summer of 1693, they were both concerned in the affair of Margaret Rule; and Cotton Mather prepared, and put into circulation, an elaborate account of it, some extracts from which have been presented, and which will be further noticed, in another connection.
His next work, in the order of time, which I shall consider, is his _Life of Sir William Phips_, printed in London, in 1697, and afterwards included in the _Magnalia_, also published in London, a few years afterwards, constituting the last part of the Second Book. _The Life of Phips_ is, perhaps, the most elaborate and finished of all Mather's productions; and "adorned," as his uncle Nathaniel Mather says, in a commendatory note, "with a very grateful variety of learning." In it, Sir William, who had died, at London, three years before, is painted in glowing colors, as one of the greatest of conquerors and rulers, "dropped, as it were, from the Machine of Heaven;" "for his exterior, he was one tall, beyond the common lot of men; and thick, as well as tall, and strong as well as thick. He was, in all respects, exceedingly robust, and able to conquer such difficulties of diet and of travel, as would have killed most men alive;" "he was well set, and he was therewithall of a very comely, though a very manly, countenance." He is described as of "a most incomparable generosity," "of a forgiving spirit." His faults are tenderly touched; "upon certain affronts, he has made sudden returns, that have shewed choler enough; and he has, by blow, as well as by word, chastised incivilities."
It is remarkable that Mather should have laid himself out, to such an extent of preparation and to such heights of eulogy, as this work exhibits. It is dedicated to the Earl of Bellamont, just about to come over, as Phips's successor. Mather held in his hand a talisman of favor, influence, and power. In the Elegy which concludes the _Life_, are lines like these:
"Phips, our great friend, our wonder, and our glory, The terror of our foes, the world's rare story, Or but name Phips, more needs not be expressed, Both Englands, and next ages, tell the rest."
The writer of this _Life_ had conferred the gift of an immortal name upon one Governor of New England, and might upon another.
But with all this panegyric, he does not seem to have been careful to be just to the memory of his hero. The reader is requested, at this point, to turn back to pages 23, 24, of this article, and examine the paragraph, quoted from the _Life of Phips_, introducing the return of _Advice_ from the Ministers. I have shown, in that connection, how deceptive the expression "arriving to his Government" is. In reporting the _Advice_ of the Ministers, in the _Life of Phips_, Mather omits the paragraphs I have placed within brackets [_p. 21, 22_]--the _first_, _second_ and _eighth_. The omission of these paragraphs renders the document, as given by Mather, an absolute misrepresentation of the transaction, and places Phips in the attitude of having disregarded the advice of the Ministers, in suffering the trials to proceed as they did; throwing upon his memory a load of infamy, outweighing all the florid and extravagant eulogies showered upon him, in the _Life_: verifying and fulfilling the apprehensions he expressed in his letter of the fourteenth of October, 1692: "I know my enemies are seeking to turn it all upon me."
The Reviewer says that "Mr. Mather did not profess to quote the whole _Advice_, but simply made extracts from it." He professed to give what the Ministers "declared." I submit to every honorable mind, whether what Mather printed, omitting the _first_, _second_ and _eighth_ Sections, was a fair statement of what the Ministers "declared."
The paragraphs he selected, appear, on their face, to urge caution and even delay, in the proceedings. They leave this impression on the general reader, and have been so regarded from that day to this. The artifice, by which the responsibility for what followed was shifted, from the Ministers, upon Phips and the Court, has, in a great measure, succeeded. I trust that I have shown that the clauses and words that seem to indicate caution, had very little force, in that direction; but that, when the disguising veil of an artful phraseology is removed, they give substantial countenance to the proceedings of the Court, throughout.
I desire, at this point, to ask the further attention of the reader to Mather's manner of referring to the _Advice of the Ministers_. In his _Wonders_, he quotes the _eighth_ and _second_ Articles of it (_Pages 12, 55_), in one instance, ascribing the _Advice_ to "Reverend persons,"
"men of God," "gracious men," and, in the other, characterizing it as "gracious words." He also, in the same work, quotes the _sixth_ Article, _omitting the words I have placed in brackets, without any indication of an omission_. Writing, in 1692, when the delusion was at its height, and for the purpose of keeping the public mind up to the work of the prosecutions, he gloried chiefly in the _first_, _second_, and _eighth_ Articles, and brought them alone forward, in full. The others he passed over, with the exception of the _sixth_, from which he struck out the central sentence--that having the appearance of endorsing the views of those opposed to spectral testimony. But, in 1697, when the _Life of Phips_ was written, circumstances had changed. It was apparent, then, to all, even those most unwilling to realize the fact, that the whole transaction of the witchcraft prosecutions in Salem was doomed to perpetual condemnation; and it became expedient to drop out of sight, forever, if possible, the _second_ and _eighth_ articles, and reproduce the _sixth_, _entire_.
Considering the unfair view of the import of the _Advice_, in the _Life of Phips_, and embodied in the _Magnalia_--a work, which, with all its defects, inaccuracies, and absurdities, is sure of occupying a conspicuous place in our Colonial literature--I said: "unfortunately for the reputation of Cotton Mather, Hutchinson has preserved the _Address of the Ministers_, entire." Regarding the document published by Mather in the light of a historical imposture, I expressed satisfaction, that its exposure was provided in a work, sure of circulation and preservation, equally, to say the least, with the _Life of Phips_ or the _Magnalia_. The Reviewer, availing himself of the opportunity, hereupon pronounces me ignorant of the fact that the "_Advice_, entire," was published by Increase Mather at the end of his _Cases of Conscience_; and, in his usual style--not, I think, usual, in the _North American Review_--speaks thus--it is a specimen of what is strown through the article: "Mr. Upham should have been familiar enough with the original sources of information on the subject, to have found this _Advice_ in print, seventy-four years before Hutchinson's _History_ appeared."
Of course, neither I, nor any one else, can be imagined to suppose that Hutchinson invented the document. It was pre-existent, and at his hand.
It was not to the purpose to say where he found it. I wonder this Reviewer did not tell the public, that I had _never seen_, _read_, or _heard of_ Calef; for, to adopt his habit of reasoning, if I had been acquainted with that writer, my ignorance would have been enlightened, as Calef would have informed me that "the whole of the Minister's advice and answer is printed in _Cases of Conscience_, the last pages."
That only which finds a place in works worthy to endure, and of standard value, is sure of perpetual preservation. Hutchinson's _History of Massachusetts_ is a work of this description. Whatever is committed to its custody will stand the test of time. This cannot be expected of that class of tracts or books to which _Cases of Conscience_ belongs, copies of which can hardly be found, and not likely to justify a separate re-publication. It has, indeed, not many years ago, been reprinted in England, in a series of _Old Authors_, tacked on to the _Wonders of the Invisible World_. But few copies have reached this country; and only persons of peculiar, it may almost be said, eccentric, tastes, would care to procure it. It will be impossible to awaken an interest in the general reading public for such works. They are forbidding in their matter, unintelligible in their style, obscure in their import and drift, and pervaded by superstitions and absurdities that have happily passed away, never, it is to be hoped, again to enter the realm of theology, philosophy, or popular belief; and will perish by the hand of time, and sink into oblivion. If this present discussion had not arisen, and the "_Advice_, entire," had not been given by Hutchinson, the _suppressio veri_, perpetrated by Cotton Mather, would, perhaps, have become permanent history.
In reference to the _Advice of the Ministers_, the Reviewer, in one part of his article, seems to complain thus: "Mr. Upham has never seen fit to print this paper;" in other parts, he assails me from the opposite direction, and in a manner too serious, in the character of the assault, to be passed over. In my book, (_ii., 267_) I thus speak of the _Advice of the Ministers_, referring to it, in a note to p. 367, in similar terms: "The response of the reverend gentlemen, while urging in general terms the importance of caution and circumspection in the methods of examination, decidedly and earnestly recommended that the proceedings should be vigorously carried on."
It is a summary, in general and brief terms, _in my own language_, of the _import_ of the whole document, covering both sets of its articles.
Hutchinson condenses it in similar terms, as do Calef and Douglas. I repeat, and beg it to be marked, that I do _not quote it_, in _whole_ or _in part_, but only give its import in my own words. I claim the judgment of the reader, whether I do not give the import of the articles Mather printed in the _Life of Phips_--those pretending to urge caution--as fairly as of the articles he omitted, applauding the Court, and encouraging it to go on.
Now, this writer in the _North American Review_ represents to the readers of that journal and to the public, that I have _quoted_ the _Advice of the Ministers_, and, in variety of phrase, rings the charge of unfair and false _quotation_, against me. He uses this language: "If it were such a heinous crime for Cotton Mather, in writing the _Life of Sir William Phips_, to omit three Sections, how will Mr. Upham vindicate his own omissions, when, writing the history of these very transactions and bringing the gravest charges against the characters of the persons concerned, he leaves out seven Sections?" I _quoted_ no Section, and made no _omissions_; and it is therefore utterly unjustifiable to say that I _left out_ any thing. I gave the substance of the Sections Cotton Mather left out, in language nearly identical with that used by Hutchinson and all others. In the same way, I gave the substance of the Sections Mather published, in the very sense he always claimed for them.
What I said did not bear the form, nor profess the character, of a _quotation_.