Page:Notes and Queries - Series 11 - Volume 5.djvu/274

 NOTES AND QUERIES, iii s. v. MAR. 23, 1912.

desfiretl by my Lord Chief Baron " to give his judgment in the case"; and it is the learned if somewhat confusing statement then made by Sir Thomas Browne which has caused his admirers so much uneasiness. The substance of what he said is set out in the original query (see above). It was to the effect that in his opinion the persons were bewitched, and " that in Denmark there had been lately a great discovery of witches, who used the very same way of afflicting persons, by conveying pins into them," as in the case before the Court. According to Hutchinson, this declaration influenced the jury, and " turned back the scale, which was otherwise inclining to the favour of the accused per- sons." He goes on to say that the Judge was troubled and doubtful, and " in such fears that he would not so much as sum up the evidence," but " put it off from himself as much as he could," and left it to the jury with a prayer to the " great God of heaven that he would direct their hearts in that weighty matter," and that the jury, " having Browne's declaration for their encourage- ment," in half an hour brought in the pri- soners guilty upon all thirteen indictments ; it being suggested that if Browne had only held his tongue, the prisoners would have been acquitted.

So much for Hutchinson. That he did excellent work in writing down the murderous superstition of witchcraft cannot be denied, but he was not a good law reporter. A more scrupulous writer would have placed Browne's declaration where it in fact occurred, namely, at an early stage of the proceedings, when only eight out of twelve witnesses for the prosecution had been called, and before the j ury were in possession of all the facts. It seems that after eight witnesses had given evidence, Serjeant Keeling, who was either joined in the com- mission as one of the judges, or else gave his opinion as amicus ctirice, declared that he thought the evidence was not sufficient to convict the prisoners (Report, p. 40), and that the Judge turned to Browne and asked him what he thought of it. Browne there- upon made his statement, which, however, cannot have been of much assistance to the Court.

The proceedings then took an extremely practical turn. Mr. Serjeant Keeling, Lord Cornwallis, and Sir Edmund Bacon, who were present in Court, made certain experiments, at the Judge's request, upon the children who were alleged to have been bewitched. It was found that when their eyes were bandaged, the children

shrieked and played off their tricks when touched by a third person in exactly the same way as when they were touched by the prisoners, whereupon these gentlemen openly protested that in their opinion the whole business was an imposture. By placing this in such a way as to lead one to suppose that it all took place before Browne had been appealed to by the Judge, Hutchinson at once shifts the responsibility for the verdict on to Browne's shoulders. It would appear from Hutchinson's account that when Browne made his statement the whole case against the prisoners was complete ; that several eminent men had expressed their- opinion in the strongest possible terms as to- the character of the evidence ; that the- Judge, at his wits' end and anxious to acquit,, had turned to Browne as his last resource ? and that Browne, in the face of the Court and of the opinion of the other gentlemen? present, had declared against the prisoners,, when a word in the prisoners' favour would have saved their lives. As a matter of fact, the suggestion is wholly unfounded. There is nothing to show that Browne was im Court at the time the experiments were made.

The effect of these experiments was " to> put the Court and all persons into a stand.'' Further evidence was then called, the caso was concluded, and the Judge proceeded to- sum up. His direction to the jury is set out in full at pp. 55-7 of the Report. It is most direct and to the point, and there can have been little doubt in. the mind of the jury that they were expected to convict. The direction is quite brief. The Judge puts nothing off from himself. There is- no men- tion of Browne's name, no mention of Mr. Serjeant Keeling, or of the other gentlemem who undertook the experiments referred to above. The Judge expressly refrains from commenting on the evidence, states his; belief in witches, and draws the jury's attention to the wisdom of nations in pro- viding laws to deal with such people. Then: follows tha appeal to the great God of heaven to direct their hearts, " for to con- demn the innocent and let the guilty go free were both an abomination to the Lord." The jury then retired to consider their verdict. It is not surprising, in the face of the Judge's remarks, that they found the prisoners guilty ; and, indeed, the evi- dence adduced by the prosecution was in itself sufficient to ensure'a conviction. That the whole business was a barefaced and malicious fabrication is apparent on the face of it, but joiriea in. those days, as far-