it is probable, gave rise to some criticism; and, as her boys grew up, became more and more disagreeable to them.  The marriage, as was natural, led to unhappy results.  In 1720, after Osburn had been dead some years, a curious case was brought into court, in which the sons of Robert Prince testified that Osburn treated their mother and them with great cruelty and barbarity.  They had become of age before their mother’s death, and had signed their names to a deed conveying away land belonging to their patrimony.  The object of the suit was to invalidate the conveyance by proving that they were compelled by Osburn to sign the deed, he using threats and violence upon them at the time.  There was an extraordinary conflict of testimony in the trial; some witnesses strongly corroborating the accusations of the Princes, and some equally strong in vindication of the character of Osburn.  It was shown, that, in the opinion of several of his neighbors, he was an industrious, respectable, and worthy person.  It is difficult to determine the precise merits of the case.  After the death of his wife, Osburn married Ruth, a daughter of William Cantlebury, and widow of William Sibley.  She was a woman of unquestioned excellence of character, and of a large landed estate.  Osburn was her third husband, the first having been Thomas Small.  After her marriage to Osburn, he and she joined the church, and were reputable persons in all respects.  He was well regarded as a citizen, and often on the parish committee.  Neither he nor the widow Sibley appear to have been implicated in the witchcraft proceedings in any other particular than that he testified that his then wife Sarah had not been for some time at meeting.  There is no indication that this was volunteer testimony.  He and his wife Ruth were among the firmest opponents of Mr. Parris.  There is no mention of his having had children by either of his American wives.  His son John, who probably came with him to the country, was an inhabitant of the Village; and his name is on the rate-list, for the last time, in 1718, his father having died some years before.  The Osborne family, in this part of the country, does not appear to have sprung from this source.

Without attempting to decide where, or in what proportions, the blame is to be laid, the fact is evident, that the marriage of the widow Sarah Prince to Alexander Osburn was an unhappy one.  Her mind became depressed, if not distracted.  For some time, she had been bedridden.  Of course, as she had occupied a respectable social position, and was a woman of property, her case naturally gave rise to scandal.  Rumor was busy and gossip rife in reference to her; and it was quite natural that she should have been suggested for the accusing girls to pitch upon.  The following is an account of her examination by the magistrates, in the handwriting of John Hathorne:—­

     “Sarah Osburne, upon examination, denied the matter of fact,
     viz., that she ever understood or used any witchcraft, or
     hurt any of the abovesaid children.