“ANSWER I.—­By the number of persons accused.  It cannot be imagined, that, in a place of so much knowledge, so many, in so small a compass of land, should so abominably leap into the Devil’s lap,—­at once.

“ANS.  II.—­The quality of several of the accused was such as did bespeak better things, and things that accompany salvation.  Persons whose blameless and holy lives before did testify for them; persons that had taken great pains to bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, such as we had charity for as for our own souls,—­and charity is a Christian duty, commended to us in 1 Cor. xiii., Col. iii. 14, and many other places.

     “ANS.  III.—­The number of the afflicted by Satan daily
     increased, till about fifty persons were thus vexed by the
     Devil.  This gave just ground to suspect some mistake.

“ANS.  IV.—­It was considerable, that nineteen were executed, and all denied the crime to the death; and some of them were knowing persons, and had before this been accounted blameless livers.  And it is not to be imagined but that, if all had been guilty, some would have had so much tenderness as to seek mercy for their souls in the way of confession, and sorrow for such a sin.

“ANS.  V.—­When this prosecution ceased, the Lord so chained up Satan, that the afflicted grew presently well:  the accused are generally quiet, and for five years since we have no such molestation by them.”

Such reasonings as these found their way into the minds of the whole community; and it became the melancholy conviction of all candid and considerate persons that innocent blood had been shed.  Standing where we do, with the lights that surround us, we look back upon the whole scene as an awful perversion of justice, reason, and truth.

On the 13th of June, 1700, Abigail Faulkner presented a well-expressed memorial to the General Court, in which she says that her pardon “so far had its effect, as that I am yet suffered to live, but this only as a malefactor convict upon record of the most heinous crimes that mankind can be supposed to be guilty of;” and prays for “the defacing of the record” against her.  She claims it as no more than a simple act of justice; stating that the evidence against her was wholly confined to the “afflicted, who pretended to see me by their spectral sight, and not with their bodily eyes.”  That “the jury (upon only their testimony) brought me in ‘Guilty,’ and the sentence of death was passed upon me;” and that it had been decided that such testimony was of no value.  The House of Representatives felt the force of her appeal, and voted that “the prayer of the petitioner be granted.”  The council declined to concur, but addressed “His Excellency to grant the petitioner His Majesty’s gracious pardon; and His Excellency expressed His readiness to grant the same.”  Some adverse influence, it seemed, prevailed to prevent it.