h Ludlow alone, told him that Goodwife Staplies was a
witch.

Some time afterward Ludlow, at New Haven, told the Rev. John Davenport
and his wife the story, in confidence, and under the promise of secrecy,
but it spread abroad with inevitable accretions, and when it reached
Fairfield Thomas Staplies went to law, to vindicate his wife's character
in pounds, shillings, and pence. These are some of the statements and
remarkable testimonies:

_Attorney Banke's declaration--Ensigne Bryan's answer--Davenport's view
of an oath, Hebrews vi,16--His account and conscientious scruples--Mistress
Davenport's forgetfulness--"A tract of lying"--"Indian gods"--Luce Pell
and Hester Ward's visit to the prison--The "search" of Knapp--"Witches
teates"--Feminine resemblances--Matronly opinions--Post-mortem evidence--
Contradictions--Knapp's ordeal--"Fished wthall in private"--Her denials--
Talk on the road to the "gallowes"_

"John Bankes, atturny for Thomas Staplies, declared, that Mr. Ludlow had
defamed Thomas Staplies wife, in reporting to Mr. Dauenport and Mris.
Dauenport that she had laid herselfe vnder a new suspition of being a
witch, that she had caused Knapps wife to be new searched after she was
hanged, and when she saw the teates, said if they were the markes of a
witch, then she was one, or she had such markes; secondly, Mr. Ludlow
said Knapps wife told him that goodwife Staplies was a witch; thirdly,
that Mr. Ludlow hath slandered goodwife Staplies in saying that she made
a trade of lying, or went on in a tract of lying, &c.

"Ensigne Bryan, atturny for Mr. Ludlow, desired the charge might bee
proued, wch accordingly the plant' did, and first an attestation vnder
Master Dauenports hand, conteyning the testimony of Master and Mistris
Dauenport, was presented and read; but the defendant desired what was
testified and accepted for proofe might be vpon oath, vpon wch Mr.
Dauenport gaue in as followeth, That he hoped the former attestation hee
wrott and sent to the court, being compared wth Mr. Ludlowes letter, and
Mr. Dauenports answer, would haue satisfyed concerning the truth of the
pticulars wthout his oath, but seeing Mr. Ludlowes atturny will not be
so satisfyed, and therefore the court requires his oath, and yt he
lookes at an oath, in a case of necessitie, for confirmation of truth,
to end strife among men, as an ordinance of God, according to Heb: 6,16,
hee therevpon declares as followeth,

"That Mr. Ludlow, sitting wt