THE WITCHCRAFT DELUSION IN COLONIAL CONNECTICUT; 1647-1697; BY JOHN M. TAYLOR; 1908

MERCY (DISBRO) DISBOROUGH

A special court, presided over by Robert Treat, Governor, was held at Fairfield by order of the General Court, to try the witch cases, and September 14, 1692, a true bill was exhibited against Mercy Disborough, wife of Thomas Disborough of Compo in Fairfield, in these words:

Mercy Disborough is complayned of &accused as guilty of witchcraft for that on the 25t of Aprill 1692 &in the 4th year of their Maties reigne &at sundry other times she hath by the instigation &help of the diuill in a preternaturall way afflicted &don harme to the bodyes &estates of sundry of their Maties subjects or to some of them contrary to the law of God, the peace of our soueraigne lord &lady the King &Queen their crowne &dignity.

Others were indicted and tried, at this session of the court and its adjournments, notably Elizabeth Clawson. Many depositions were taken in Fairfield and elsewhere, some of the defendants were discharged and others convicted, but Mercy Disborough's case was the most noted one in the tests applied, and in the conclusions to which it led. The whole case with its singular incidents is worthy of careful study. Some of the testimony is given here

JOHN BARLOW—Mesmeric influence—Light and darkness—The falling out

John Barlow eaged 24 years or thairabout saieth and sd testifieth that soumtime this last year that as I was in bedd in the hous that Mead Jesuop then liuied in that Marsey Desbory came to me and layed hold on my fett and pinshed them (and) looked wishley in my feass and I strouff to rise and cold not and too speek and cold not. All the time that she was with me it was light as day as it semed to me—but when shee uanicht it was darck and I arose and hade a paine in my feet and leags some time after an our or too it remained. Sometime before this aforesd Marcey and I had a falling out and shee sayed that if shee had but strength shee would teer me in peses.

Sworn in court Septr 19, 92. Attests John Allyn.

BENJAMIN DUNING—Cast into ye watter—Vindication of innocence—Mercy not to be hanged alone

A Speciall Cort held in Fairfield this 2d of June 1692.

Marcy Disbrow ye wife of Thomas Disbrow of Fairfield was sometimes lately accused by Catren Branch servant to Daniell Wescoat off tormenting her whereupon sd Mercy being sent for to Stanford and ther examined upon suspecion of witchcraft before athaurity and fro thnce conueyed to ye county jaile and sd Mercy ernestly desireing to be tryed by being cast into ye watter yesterday wch was done this day being examind what speciall reason she had to be so desiring of such a triall her answer was yt it was to vindicate her innocency allso she sd Mercy being asked if she did not say since she was duckt yt if she was hanged shee would not be hanged alone her answer was yt she did say to Benje Duning do you think yt I would be such a fooll as to be hanged allone. Sd Benj. Duning aged aboue sixteen years testifies yt he heard sd Mercy say yesterday that if she was hanged she would not be hanged allone wch was sd upon her being urged to bring out others that wear suspected for wiches.

Sept 15 1692 Sworn in Court by Benj. Duning attest John Allyn Secy

Joseph Stirg aged about 38 declares that he wth Benj. Duning being at prison discoursing with the prisoner now at the bar he heard her say if she were hanged she would not be hanged alone. He tould her she implicitly owned herself a witch.

Sworn in Court Sept. 15, atests John Allyn, Secry.

JOHN GRUMMON—A sick child—Its unbewitching—Benit's threats—Mercy's tenderness

John Grummon senr saith yt about six year agou he being at Compo with his wife &child &ye child being very well as to ye outward vew and it being suddenly taken very ill &so remained a little while upon wch he being much troubled went out &heard young Thomas Benit threaten Mercy Disbrow &bad her unbewitch his uncles child whereupon she came ouer to ye child &ye child was well.

Thomas Benit junr aged 27 years testifieth yt at ye same time of ye above sd childs illness he came into ye house wher it was &he spoke to sd John Gruman to go &scould at Mercy &tould him if he sd Gruman would not he would wherupon he sd Benit went out and called to Mercy &bad her come and unbewitch his unkle Grumans child or else he would beat her hart out then sd mercy imediatly came ouer and stroaked ye child &sd God forbad she should hurt ye child and imediately after ye child was well.

It has been heretofore noted that during her trial—from the records of which the foregoing testimony has been taken—the prisoner Mercy Disborough was subjected to a search for witch marks by a committee of women, faithfully sworn narrowly and truly to inspect and search. This indignity was repeated, and the women agreed “that there is found on her boddy as before they found, and nothing else.

But the accused in order to her further detection was subjected to another test of English parentage, recommended by the authorities and embodied in the criminal codes. It was the notorious water test, or ordeal by water. September 15, 1692, this test was made, chiefly on the testimony of a young girl subject to epileptic fits and hysterics, who was carried into the meetinghouse where the examination was being held. Thus runs the record:

Daniel Westcott's gerle—Scenes in the meeting house—Ye girl”Mercy's voice—Usual paroxisme

The afflicted person being carried into ye meeting house &Mercy Disbrow being under examination by ye honable court &whilst she was speaking ye girl came to her sences, &sd she heard Mercy Disbrow saying withall where is she, endeavoring to raise herself, with her masters help got almost up, in ye open view of present, &Mercy Disbrow looking about on her, she immediately fel down into a fit again. A 2d time she came to herself whilst in ye meeting house, &askd whers Mercy, I hear her voice, &with that turned about her head (she lying with her face from her) &lookd on her, then laying herself down in like posture as before sd tis she, Ime sure tis she, &presently fell into a like paroxisme or fit as she usually is troubled with.

Mercy Disborough, and another woman on trial at the same time (Elizabeth Clauson), were put to the test together, and two eyewitnesses of the sorry exhibition of cruelty and delusion made oath that they saw Mercy and Elizabeth bound hand and foot and put into the water, and that they swam upon the water like a cork, and when one labored to press them into the water they buoyed up like cork.

October 28, 1692, this entry appears of record:

The jury being called to make a return of their indictment that had been committed to them concerning Mercy Disborough, they return that they find the prisoner guilty according to the indictment of familiarity with Satan. The jury being sent forth upon a second consideration of their verdict returned that they saw no reason to alter their verdict, but to find her guilty as before. The court approved of their verdict and the Governor passed sentence of death upon her.

Filed: Reasons of Repreuing Mercy Desbrough.

To the Honrd Gen: Assembly of Connecticut Colony sitting in Hartford. Reasons of repreuing Mercy Disbrough from being put to death until this Court had cognizance of her case.

First, because wee that repreued her had power by the law so to do. Secondly, because we had and haue sattisfying reasons that the sentence of death passed against her ought not to be executed which reasons we give to this Court to be judge of 1st. The jury that brought her in guilty (which uerdict was the ground of her condemnation) was not the same jury who were first charged with this prisoners deliuerance and who had it in charg many weeks. Mr. Knowles was on the jury first sworn to try this woman and he was at or about York when the Court sate the second time and when the uerdict was given, the jury was altered and another man sworn.

It is so inuiolable a practice in law that the indiudual jurors and jury that is charged with the deliuerance of a prisoner in a capital case and on whom the prisoner puts himself or herself to be tryed must try it and they only that al the presidents in Old England and New confirm it and not euer heard of til this time to be inouated. And yet not only president but the nature of the thing inforces it for to these juors the law gaue this power vested it in them they had it in right of law and it is incompatible and impossible that it should be uested in these and in others too for then two juries may haue the same power in the same case one man altered the jury is altered.

Tis the birthright of the Kings' subjects so and no otherwise to be tryed and they must not be despoyled of it.

Due form of law is that alone wherein the ualidity of verdicts and judgments in such cases stands and if a real and apparent murtherer be condemned and executed out of due form of law it is inditable against them that do it for in such case the law is superseded by arbitrary doings.

What the Court accepts and the prisoner accepts differing from the law is nothing what the law admitts is al in the case.

If one jury may be changed two, ten, the whole may be so, and solemn oathe made uain.

Wee durst not but dissent from and declare against such alterations by our repreueing therefore the said prisoner when ye were informed of this business about her jury, and we pray this honored Court to take heed what they do in it now it is roled to their doore and that at least they be well sattisfied from able lawyers that such a chang is in law alowable ere this prisoner be executed least they bring themselues into inextricable troubles and the whole country. Blood is a great thing and we cannot but open our mouths for the dumb in the cause of one appointed to die by such a uerdict.

2dly. We had a good accompt of the euidences giuen against her that none of them amounted to what Mr. Perkins, Mr. Bernard and Mr. Mather with others state as sufficiently conuictiue of witchcraft, namely 1st Confession (this there was none of) 2dly two good wittnesses proueing som act or acts done by the person which could not be but by help of the deuill, this is the summe of what they center in as thair books show as for the common things of spectral euidence il euents after quarels or threates, teates, water tryalls and the like with suspitious words they are al discarded and som of them abominated by the most judicious as to be conuictiue of witchcraft and the miserable toyl they are in the Bay for adhereing to these last mentioned litigious things is warning enof, those that will make witchcraft of such things will make hanging work apace and we are informed of no other but such as these brought against this woman.

These in brief are our reasons for repreueing this prisoner. May 12th, 1693.

The Court may please to consider also how farr these proceedings do put a difficulty on any further tryal of this woman.

All honor to Joseph Elliot, Timothy Woodbridge and their ministerial associates; to Samuel Willis, Pitkin and Nath. Stanly, level-headed men of affairs, all friends of the court called upon for advice and counsel—who gave it in full scriptural measure.

[Footnote H: Mercy Disborough was pardoned, as the records show that she was living in 1707.]