History of the Connecticut Valley in Massachusetts, with illustrations and biographical sketches of some of its prominent men and pioneers, Vol. I, Part 14

Author: L.H. Everts & Co
Publication date: 1879
Publisher: Philadelphia : Louis H. Everts
Number of Pages: 700

USA > Massachusetts > History of the Connecticut Valley in Massachusetts, with illustrations and biographical sketches of some of its prominent men and pioneers, Vol. I > Part 14

Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).

" Answering, Hugh Parsons saith, I said not that I would be

HISTORY OF THE CONNECTICUT VALLEY.

even with bim ; but this I said, if he would hold me to my bargain I could puzzle him in the bargain.

" John Mathews being present, saith, upon oath, that when he went with Hugh Parsons to fetch some of his fannell bricks, he said to Hugh Parsons: 'Do not you make more bricks for Mr. Moxon's chimnies he will stay with us now, and then I believe he will have up his chimnies.' Hugh Par- sons said, 'No; that I know of;' then said I, ' Mr. Moxon will hold you to your bargain about the said bricks ;' then said he, ' If he do I will be even with him.' And when Hugh Parsons made my ehimnies he did often use the same speech ; and when he is displeased with anybody it his usual speech.

" At this testimony of John Mathews, Hugh Parsons was silent and made no reply.

" Mr. Moxon being present, saith, the same week that I spake to Hugh Parsons about the bricks, and to his wife about another business, my daughter Martha was taken ill with her fitts. I confess, also, that when I spake to him of the said bargain, that ITugh said I could not, in strictness, hold him to the bargain. But this last answer doth not take off' the ill purpose of his former threatening.

" 4th. Sarah, the wife of Alexander Edwards, testifies upon oath, Feb. 27th, 1650, that about two years ago, more or less, Ilugh Parsons, being then at the Longmeadow, came to her house to buy some milk ; she said, ' I will give you a half- penny worth, but I cannot let you have any more at this time.' This was at that time when my cow gave three quarts at a meal ; but the next meal after she gave not above a quart, and it was as yellow as saffron, and yet the cow ailed nothing that I could discerne. The next meal it altered to another strange, odd color, and so it did every meal; for a week together it still altered to some odd color or other, and also it grew less and less; and yet all the while the cow was as well as at any time before, as far as I could discerne; and about a week after she began to mend her milk again, without any means used. Upon this I had thoughts that Hugh Par- sons might be the cause of it.

" Alexander Edwards swore that George Coulton saw the milk in strange colors.

" Hugh Parsons saith that he did not lie one night at ye Long Meddow that Somer, but only in the Spring of the Yeere, eather in March or in the beginning of Aprill, when he set up fencing there, and that he never had Milk of her but that one Tyme; and at that Tyme of the Yeere he thinks her Cow could not give three Quarts at a Meale.

" But now at his 2nd Examination, May the 18th, 1650, he seeing Alexander Edwards about to testify ye contrary, he confesseth that he lay a night there in plantinge Tyme, about the end of May.

" I remember ye Alexander Edwards came to me to tell me of this accident, and said that he was perswaded the Cow was bewitched by Hugh Parsons; but I did not believe him at that tyme. I rather conceived that the Cow was falling into some dangerous sickness ; for such a sudden abatement I tould him was a sign of some dangerous sicknesse at hand ; but, see- inge no sicknesse followed, I tould Hugh Parsons that such a sudden change could not come from a Naturall Cause.

" 5thly. Anthony Dorchester saicth upon oath, Fehy. 25, 1650, the Ist Day of the Ist Month and the 18th Day, that about September was twelve Monthes, four had cquall shares in a Cow; each had a Quarter, and ye Offall was to be divided also; and Ilugh Parsons desired to have the roote of tbe Tongue; but he had it not, it fell to my share; and a eer- taine time after I had salted it, I tooke the said Roote and another peace of Meete, and put it into the Kettle as it was boylinge over the Fire at Hugh Parsons' House, where I lived at that present; and there was no body there but his wife, and I and my wife, who was sick of a consumption, sittinge on her bed and not able to gett of without help; neather were any of my children able to take such a Thinge

out of a boyling kettle. This being the Sabbath Day, Hugh Parsons and his wife went to Church before me; then I made myself ready and went presently after them, and came Home before them, and took up my Meate before they came Home, but the Roote of the Tounge, which Hugh Parsons formerly desyred, was gonn ; his wife come Ilome presently after mne (but he came not with her). Then I told her, and she won- dered how it could be gonn ; and she went to ye Tubb where it was salted to see if it might nott be forgotten, and it was not there. Then said I to her, I am sure I put it into the boyling Kettle, and she confessed that she saw me pick it and wash it, and being present did much wonder ye strange going of it away, and said that she feared her Husband might convey it away. She tould me that her Husband went along with her till we came to Goodman Merrieke's, and was very pleasing to her, more than usually he had bin a great while before ; but there he laid the Child downe and went no further with her ; and she saw him no more till ye Meeting was ahnost donn (all this Mary Parsons, being present, dothe acknowledg). Presently after this he came home; then I spake of it to him, and all that he said was that he thought I did not put it in ; hut I tould him that I was sure I put it into the boyling Kettle. And I have ever since believed that no Hand of Man did take it away, but that it was taken away by Witchcraft.

" Ans. Hugh Parsons confesseth that he desyred the Roote of ye Toung, but withall saith he is ignorant as ye Child unborn which way it went. Some by-Standard objected it might be taken away by his wife as well as by him. But that is not so likely, because Hugh Parsons went not with her to ye Meeting, but laid down her Child and went from her, and she saw him no more till Meeting was almost donn.

" Ans. Hugh Parsons saith that he doth not remember that he went away any whither, unlesse he might go into Good- win Merricke's Ilowse to take a pipe of Tobacco ; and though his wife saw him no more till the Meeting was almost donn, yet he saith he might be standing without the Dore, though she saw him not. And at his 2nd examination he asked how it did appeare that he came not to the Meeting till it was almost donn.

" Abigail Mun, being present, doth testifie upon Oath that she knew by the Talk aboutt the strange going away of this Roote of the Toung what Sabbath was meant, and she saith that she saw him come that Sabbath to ye meeting when ye Sermon was well onward.

"Jonathan Taylor deposed in open Courte, saith that he heard the said Parsons say (notwithstanding the Roote of the Toung was desired by Anthony Dorchester for his wife, being sicke), yett he said I will have it.

"6thly. Griffin Jones saith upon Oath, Feby. 25, 1650, March 1 and 18 Day, that when he lived at his House neere Hugh Parsons' House about 2 yrs. agoe, on a Lord's Day I went Home to Dinner ; I took up my Dinner and laid it on a little Table made on ye Cradle Head. I sought for a Knife and could not find any. I cleered the Table where I dined to see if any were there ; and I searched every where about ye House, and I could find none. I went to an ould Basket where I had Things to mend Shoes withall, and there was a rusty Knife, and with that I was faine to eate my Dinner. After l had dined, I tooke away ye Victuals that were left and laid it up; and then I laid the rusty Knife on the corner of the Table to cutt a pip of Tobacco withall.

" But before I cut my Tobacco I first went out of Dore to serve a Pigg that was a very little of the Dore, and no man could come in but I must see them ; and as soon as I come in to cutt my Tobaeco with the said rusty knife, there lay three Knives together on ye Table, which made me blush, wondering how they come there seeing no Body was in ye House but my self ; and I was going to cut ye Tobacco, Hugh Parsons come in, and said, where is the Man? Are you ready to go to ye Meet-

HISTORY OF THE CONNECTICUT VALLEY.

inge ? I said hy and by, as soon as I have taken a pipe of Tobacco. So he staid and took some with me.

" Ans. Hugh Parsons saith he is ignorant of any such Thing, and in the sight of God can cleare his Conscience.

" It was tould him that such a strange Thinge fallinge oute just at his comeing in did minister just occasion of Suspition of Witchcraft ; he replyed that one Witness was not sufficient.

" 7thly. Mary Parsons, his wife, saith that one Reason why she doth suspect you to be a Witch is because you cannot abide that any thing should be spoken against Witches. She saith that you tould her that you were at a Neighbor's House a little before Lecture, when they were speaking of Carrington and his Wife, that were now apprehended for Witches; she saith that when you came Home and spake these speeches to her she said to you, I hope that God will find out all such wicked Persons and purge New England of all Witches ere it be long. To this she saith you gave her a naughty looke, but never a word ; but presently after, on a leight Occasion, you took up a Block, and made as if you would throw it at her head, but yet, in ye end, you did not, but threw it downe on ye hearth of ve chimney. This expression of ye anger was because she wished the Ruin of all Witches.

" Mary Ashley testifies this substance uppon Oath.

"Ans. Hugh Parsons saith he dare not remember that ever he tooke up a Block to throw at her, but uppon further De- bate he said at last that he tooke up a Block but remembered not the Occasion ; at his 2nd Answer he saith that he took up no Block on that Occasion.

" Replie: it might well be on that Occasion, for not long since she saith that you said to her, if ever any Trouble doe come unto you, it will be by her Meanes, and that she would be the Meanes to hang you.

"Ans. Hugh Parsons saith that he might say so, because in his Anger he is impatient, and doth speak what he should not. At his 2nd Examination, he said he might say so, because she is the worst Enemy that I have, considering the Relation that is betweene us ; and if any Body bespeake Evill of me she will speake as ill and as much as any Body else.

" Mary Parsons replied. I have often intreated him to con- fesse whether he were a Witeh or no. I tould him that if he would acknowledge it I would begg the Prayers of God's Pro- ple on my knees for him ; and that we are not our owne, we are bought with a Price, and that God would redeeme from the power of Sathan, &e.

" Hugh Parsons was asked if his Wife had spoken Anything to him at any Tyme to confess Witchcraft.

" Ans. Not anything to me about Witcheraft, that I remember.

" Mary Parsons saith, did I not speake of it to you uppon the death of my Child ? did I not tell you then that I had jeal- ousies that you had bewitched your own Child to Death ?

" To this he was silent, and made no answer.

" Then she desyred Anthony Dorchester, that lived then in their House, whether he could not remember that she had charged her husband with the bewitching of his child.

" Anthony Dorchester said that he did not remember that ever she spoke directly to him of bewitching his Child, but that she had jealousies that he had bewitched his child to death.

" Mary Parsons said that when her last Child was ill she tould him that she suspected he had bewitched that, as he had done his other child, and said, I have spoken of it to him, and to other Folkes, together above forty Tymes.

" It was alledged that he might well be suspected to have he witched his former Child to Death, hecause he expressed no Kind of Sorrow at the Death of it.

" Ans. Hugh Parsons saith that he was loath to express any Sorrow before his wife, because of the weak condition that she was in at that Tyme.

MARY RANDALL.

The foregoing trial of Hugh Parsons and Mary, his wife. for witcheraft, seems to have been the first one had for that of- fense in the valley, and the case of Mary Randall seems to have been the last one entertained in the Hampshire County courts.

On the 29th day of September, 1691, Mary Randall was brought before the court at Springfield upon the charge of witcheraft. The complaint against her was entertained by the court, but for some reason or other,-it may have been for want of sufficient evidence to conviet her,-the case was put over for a year. William Randall, her father, became surety for her good behavior, but no trial or other proceedings were ever had. In her case the following record was made :

" Mary Randall being presented to this court for Witchcraft, the several evidences were produced and read in court. The court, upon the serious thoughts of her examination and al- leged evidence against her, did declare that there was vehe- ment suspicion of her having familiarity with the Devil ; did therefore order her committed to prison in Springfield, until security be given in the sum of ten pounds for her good behavior until the next court at Springfield, this time come twelve months.

" William Randall, her father, did become surety in the sum of twenty pounds for his said daughter, for her good behavior as aforesaid."

III. WITCHCRAFT IN NORTHAMPTON.

Mrs. Mary Pursons .- Among the most important trials for witchcraft which took place in the colony of Massachusetts Bay was that of Mrs. Mary Parsons, wife of Joseph Par- sons, a man of wealth and high standing residing at North- ampton.

In the month of July, in the year 1674, Mrs. Mary Bartlett, wife of Samuel Bartlett, of Northampton, siekened and died. Sueh "chirurgeons" as the young settlement then afforded were at a loss as to the nature of her malady, and a ready solution of the difficulty was arrived at by attributing it to witcheraft. Of course some one must be fixed upon for the witch. To the surprise of everybody, in this instance a person of no less standing and accomplishments than Mary Parsons was fixed upon as the guilty person. Soon after the death of Mrs. Bartlett, her husband, Samuel Bartlett, began to procure evidenee, in the shape of depositions made by divers persons against Mrs. Parsons, for the purpose of substantiating his ac- eusations against her before the next court, to be held at Spring- field on the 29th day of September following.

Mrs. Parsons, aware of what was going on, did not wait to be served with process, but voluntarily appeared in person be- fore the court to answer her accusers. In her plea she denied her guilt, and in a speech to the court " she did assert her own innoceney, often mentioning how clear she was of such a erime, and that the righteous God knew her innocency, and she left her cause in his hand." But, notwithstanding her most solemn protestations of innocence, the court at Springfield proceeded to entertain the case, and, as the record shows, "ap- pointed a jury of soberdized, chaste women to make diligent search upon the body of Mary Parsons, whether any marks of witcheraft appear, who gave in their account to the court on oath of what they found." This report, with the depositions, was sent to the governor and magistrates, at Boston, and Mrs. Parsons was ordered to appear before them ; and she was also bound over in the sum of fifty pounds, with her husband as surety, for her further appearance at the Hampshire County court.

On the 2d day of March, 1675, her case was presented to the grand jury of the court, and an indictment found against her. Upon the finding of the bill of indictment against her, she was sent to prison to await her trial.

Her trial came on on the 13th day of May following. In

HISTORY OF THE CONNECTICUT VALLEY.

the indictment she was charged with witchcraft, " in that she had, not having the fear of God before her eyes, entered into familiarity with the Devil, and committed sundry acts of witcheraft on the person or persons of one or more." To this charge she entered the plea of " not guilty," and after the matter was submitted to the trial-jury they brought in a ver- diet of acquittal. Thus ended the trial of Mary Parsons, of Northampton. An attempt was made afterward to fasten the guilt upon her son, John Parsons, but the court deemed the evidence against him insufficient, and the case was aban- doned.

Again, in 1679, the " powers of darkness" were visible in Northampton. On the 7th of March of that year one John Stebbins died in an " unusual manner. "

An inquest was held upon his body, with Dr. Thomas llast- ings, of Hatfield, among the twelve jurymen. The "jury found several hundred small spots on the body, as if made with small shot. These spots were scraped, and holes found under them into the body." It was suspected that this was caused by witchcraft. It is a tradition in Hadley that a short time before John Stebbins died he was at work in a saw-mill, when the logs and boards became bewitched, and cut up strange and divers capers.

The county court received the evidence in the case and trans- mitted it to Governor Bradstreet, but no further notice was taken of it .*

1V. WITCHCRAFT IN HADLEY.

In 1683 the noted case of Mary Webster, the wife of Wil- liam Wehster, occurred in Hadley. She was charged before the court at Northampton, consisting of Col. John Pynchon, of Springfield, Peter Tilton and Philip Smith, of Hadley, William Clarke and Aaron Cooke, of Northampton. She was sent to jail at Boston in April, and on the 22d of May was taken before the Governor and assistants and indicted by the grand jury. Her trial began in Boston on the 4th of Sep- tember following, and resulted in her acquittal. This case created a great deal of excitement at the time in the Connec- tient Valley, and was considered one of the most noted cases of the kind occurring in Hampshire County.

In 1685 Mary Webster was again accused of sorcery, and of committing murder by the practice of the art. But the charge was not substantiated, and the poor harassed old woman lived some years afterward, dying in 1696.

CHAPTER XIV.

THE REGICIDES.t

AFTER the restoration of Charles IT. to the throne of Eng- land, in the year 1660, the valley of the Connecticut in New England became the exile home of three of the judges who signed the death-warrant of the unfortunate Charles 1. in the year 1649, namely, Edward Whalley, William Goffe, and John Dixwell, since famous in American history us the Regi- cides.

The story of the Regicides imparts to the history of the Connecticut Valley an interest quite as melancholy as it is instructive. Of the one hundred and thirty judges com- missioned by the House of Commons to conduet the trial of the king, " seventy-four sat, sixty-seven were present at the Just session and were unanimous in passing the definitive sentence upon the king, and fifty-nine signed the warrant for his execution, 1649."

* Drake's Annals of Witchcraft, p. 140.

+ This chapter was prepared by Horace Mack.

At the time of the Restoration, in 1660, when Charles II. became king, twenty-four of the judges had died; but the vengeance of the crown followed the survivors with unflag- ging pertinacity. Nine were executed and sixteen escaped from the kingdom. Three of these came to New England,- Maj .- Gen. Edward Whalley, Maj .- Gen. William Goffe, and John Dixwell.

The family of Whalley was prominent in the reign of Henry VI. Gen. Whalley's father, Richard, was a grandson of Rich- ard Whalley, Esq., of Kirkton, in the county of Nottingham, who died in 1583, aged eighty-four. His mother was Frances, a daughter of Sir Henry Cromwell, knight, and was annt to Oliver Cromwell, the Protector. ·

Gen. Whalley married the sister of Sir George Middleton, knight, an enemy of Charles 1., and had several children, of whom one became the wife of Gen. Goffe. Although "brought up to merchandise," he was a man of great strength of mind, and took a prominent part in the stirring events of the twenty years anterior to the conviction of Charles. He was noted as a civilian, as a military commander, and as a member of Par- lament, and was among the foremost of those who opposed the king.

Gen. Goffe was a son of Rev. Stephen Goffe, a Puritan di- vine, rector of Stanmore, in Sussex. He abandoned the busi- ness of merchandising while yet a young man, entered the Parliament army, and won successively the positions of colo- nel of foot and general. He, like Whalley, became an active agent in the proceedings against the king, and was subse- quently a member of Parliament under Cromwell. It is re- corded that he " by degrees fell off from the anti-monarchical principles of the chief part of the army, and was the man, with Col. William White, who brought musqueteers and turned out the Anabaptistical members that were left behind of the Little, or ' Barebones,' Parliament out of the house,"; April, 1653.

It was the opinion of some historians that Whalley and Goffe had "escaped to the Continent, and were at Lucerne, in Switzerland, in 1664," and by others that they " wandered about for years and died in a foreign clime, but when or where unknown." The newly-settled provinces in the wilds of the Western continent promised them a safer asyhim, and so, an- ticipating by a short period the restoration of the monarchy with its quick-following penal decrees toward the surviving judges, they came to New England.

Governor Hutchinson, who wrote in 1764, and who had pos- session of Goffe's diary and other papers,¿ gives the following account :

" In the ship which arrived at Boston from London the 27th of July, 1660, there came passengers Col. Whalley and Col. Goffe, two of the late king's judges. Col. Goffe brought tes- timonials from Mr. John Row and Mr. Seth Wood, two min- isters of a church in Westminster. Col. Whalley had been n member of Mr. Thomas Goodwin's church. Goffe kept a jour- nal or diary from the day he left Westminster, May 4, until the year 1667, which, together with several other papers belonging to him, I have in my possession. Almost the whole is in char- acters or short hand, not difficult to decipher. The story of these persons has never yet been published to the world. They did not attempt to conceal their persons or characters when they arrived at Boston, but immediately went to the Gover- nor, Mr. Endicott, who received them very courteously. They were visited by the principal persons of the town ; and, among

# Fasti Oxoniensis, p. 79, as quoted by President Stiles.

¿ Mr. Jndil says (page 215), " Governor Hutchinson was in possession of Goffe's diary and his papers and letters, which had long been in the library of the Mathers in Boston. Hutchinson was a Tory, and his house was rifled by a mob in 1765, and the journal of Goffe and other papers relating to the judges are sup- posed to have been destroyed. From them he lind published in 1764 a short account of Whalley and Goffe in his first volume of the 'History of Massachu- sutta.1 "

HISTORY OF THE CONNECTICUT VALLEY.

others, they take notice of Col. Crown's coming to see them. Ile was a noted Royalist. Although they did not disguise themselves, yet they chose to reside at Cambridge, a village about four miles distant from the town, where they went the first day they arrived. They went publicly to meetings on the Lord's day, and to occasional lectures, fasts, and thanksgiv- ings, and were admitted to the sacrament, and attended private meetings for devotion, visited many of the principal towns, and were frequently at Boston ; and once, when insulted there, the person who insulted them was bound to his good behavior. They appeared grave, serions, and devout, and the rank they had sustained commanded respect. Whalley had been one of Cromwell's lieutenant-generals, and Goffe a major-general. The reports, by way of Barbadoes, were that all the judges would be pardoned but seven. When it appeared that they were not excepted, some of the principal persons in the gov- ernment were alarmed; pity and compassion prevailed with others. They had assurances from some that belonged to the General Court that they would stand by them, but were ad- vised by others to think of removing. The 22d of February, 1661, the Governor summoned a court of assistants to consult about securing them, but the court did not agree to it. Find- ing it unsafe, to remain any longer, they left Cambridge the 26th following, and arrived at New Haven the 7th of March, 1661. One Capt. Breedan, who had seen them in Boston, gave information thereof upon his arrival in England. A few days after their removal, a hue and cry, as they term it in their diary, was brought by way of Barbadoes, and thereupon a warrant to secure them issued the 8th of March from the Gov- ernor and assistants, which was sent to Springfield and other towns in the western part of the colony, but they were beyond the reach of it."

They tarried at New Haven for some days, where they met with kind treatment, but, learning of the king's proclamation, decamped on the 27th of March, and, employing an adroit strategy, appeared openly at New Milford, making themselves known, and then returned secretly to New Haven, where they lay concealed at the house of Mr. Davenport, the minister, until April 30. About this time news came of the execution of ten of the judges, with another mandate from the king, dated March 5, 1660-61, which stimulated the court to more vigorous search for the fugitives. Thomas Kirk and Thomas Kellond, who were zealous Royalists, were commissioned to search "through the colonies as far as Manhados, "-Man- hattan, now New York.

Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.

History of the Connecticut Valley in Massachusetts, with illustrations and biographical sketches of some of its prominent men and pioneers, Vol. I, Part 14

Author: L.H. Everts & Co Publication date: 1879 Publisher: Philadelphia : Louis H. Everts Number of Pages: 700

Author: L.H. Everts & Co
Publication date: 1879
Publisher: Philadelphia : Louis H. Everts
Number of Pages: 700