trine, upon which her life and the lives of all the others were
sacrificed. Looking towards "the afflicted children," who had sworn that
her spectre tortured them, the Magistrate asked, "How comes your
appearance to hurt these?" Her answer was, "How do I know? He that
appeared in the shape of Samuel, a glorified Saint, may appear in any
one's shape."

It is truly astonishing that Mather should have selected the name of
Elizabeth How, to be held up to abhorrence and classed among the
"Malefactors." It shows how utterly blinded and perverted he was by the
horrible delusion that "possessed" him. If her piety and virtue were of
no avail in leading him to pause in aspersing her memory, by selecting
her case to be included in the "black list" of those reported by him in
his _Wonders_, one would have thought he would have paid some regard to
the testimony of his clerical brethren and to the feelings of her
relatives, embracing many most estimable families. She was nearly
connected with the venerable Minister of Andover, Francis Dane, and
belonged to the family of Jacksons.

There was, and is, among the papers, a large body of evidence in her
favor, most weighty and decisive, yet Mather makes no allusion to it
whatever; although he must have known of it, from outside information as
well as the documents before him. Two of the most respectable Ministers
in the country, Phillips and Payson of Rowley, many of her neighbors,
men and women, and the father of her husband, ninety-four years of age,
testified to her eminent Christian graces, and portrayed a picture of
female gentleness, loveliness, and purity, not surpassed in the annals
of her sex. The two Clergymen exposed and denounced the wickedness of
the means that had been employed to bring the stigma of witchcraft upon
her good name. Mather not only withholds all this evidence, but speaks
with special bitterness of this excellent woman, calling her, over and
over again, throughout his whole account, "This How."

There is reason to apprehend that much cruelty was practised upon the
Prisoners, especially to force them to confess. The statements made by
John Proctor, in his letter to the Ministers, are fully entitled to
credit, from his unimpeached honesty of character, as well as from the
position of the persons addressed. It is not to be imagined, that, at
its date, on the twenty-third of July, twelve days before his trial, he
would have made, in writing, such declarations to