Many people consider the Salem Witch Trials the most controversial case of witchcraft recorded in history. The case of the Salem Witch took place in the state of Massachusetts in 1692. More than 150 men and women, including children, were locked up on allegations of practicing witchcraft. Twenty of these individuals were executed by hanging; one was crushed to death, while seven others passed in incarceration. Among those executed was Martha Carrier, whose trial was met with massive evidence submitted by witnesses who accused her of witchcraft. In the Carrier’s case, many issues make it stand out among the witnesses are her children (Martha). The argument is that the Salem witch trials were unjust and unfair and hence could not have taken place; consequently, the contradiction affirms the action as a just and appropriate way of cleansing Salem.
The Salem witchcraft accusations are virtually impossible to refute, and the defendants were found guilty despite the lack of solid evidence. Principally the allegations were based on how one related to the victim. In the Martha Carrier case, a series of accusations presented ranging from her speech, physic, and looks. The plaintiff’s judgment form against Martha Carrier made the court aware of the horrifying pain, pinching, and biting the accused has caused to the victims (Martha). The law is in place to safeguard every individual within a jurisdiction. It is only fair when the law protects everyone, and looks should not be used as a ground for administering justice. The exhibits demonstrate how the Salem witch trial was unjust and with no foundation or supporting evidence to show whether the accused was the source of the evil spirit or not.
In the trial of Martha Carrier, the plaintiffs wished nothing but death for her. The wish brings on a lot of questions about what justice entails. For instance, is it just when death is wished upon an individual with their looks and how they speak being used as evidence for convictions? Martha Carrier’s children in the trial are presented as witnesses in the case. The children frankly confessed that they were witches. In the confession, the children are seen to be remorseful and ashamed of who they are and conclude that it was their mother’s wish to become one. To the jury, the children’s confession is a clear demonstration of truth since it is backed up with references to activities, meetings, and times when everything that is related to witchcraft takes place (MATHER). Even though prosecutors would have considered the children’s confession evidence, they failed to produce this in court. The question now remains, where is the line drawn on activities done with children, how, when, and which activities are considered witchcraft? A just system should look at this open-mindedness as determining allowable activities is tricky and hard to monitor.
False accusations are yet another characteristic demonstrating how unfair the Salem witch trial was. Technically, the accused should have had the opportunity to refute the accusations by bringing defamation claims against the accusers, but they were not given that opportunity. When Benjamin Abbot confessed, he accused Martha Carrier of being angry with him when he laid out some land. In this confession, Martha Carrier sand “That she would stick as close to Abbot as the Bark stuck to the Tree; and that he should repent of it afore seven Years came to an End, so as Doctor Prescot should never cure him.” (MATHER)According to Benjamin Abbot, these words cursed a spell since his foot got swollen (MATHER). To him, the words of Martha were out of anger, causing pain and tormenting him. The vital question in this confession is, does a just system allow one to get angry when aggrieved? The law protects against the physical affliction of pain or hurt. Does a word spoken to someone cause physical pain? Answering this question proves that Benjamin Abbot wrongfully accused Martha Carrier and the law has aided in perpetrating this unjust practice and supporting defamation which it equally supports.
Most of the Salem community believed that upon jailing and incarceration of persons believed to perform witchcraft, their pain, sorrows, and torments would stop. The belief is wrong in many folds; for instance, why should one’s relief come from the pain of the other person? Martha, in this case, is taken to prison; on the other hand, Benjamin Abbot’s pain subsides as the constable takes her away. According to Benjamin Abbot’s wife Sarah, who was equally a witness in Martha’s trial, the husband was okay until they had a misunderstanding with Martha when the calamities befell him. Based on this confession, these are proof of false accusations as there is no link between the calamities that befell Benjamin Abbot and the words spoken by Martha Carrier.
The testimony by Allin Toothaker brings forth s different perspective and view on witchcraft and highlights the part about superstition. According to Allin Toothaker, after a difference ensued between him and Richard, Martha’s son, who pulled him down by the hair of the head, he could not strike back at Richard (MATHER). The pull was so strong that he fell flat on the ground with his back. While on the ground, he saw Martha’s shape go off his breast (MATHER). This testimony highlights the concept of superstition since Martha was not there at the scene, but he was delusional enough to see Martha in that setting. Moreover, Allin Toothaker sustained an injury at war and confessed that Martha cursed a spell that made the injury, not to hell. Allin Toothaker’s purported spell cannot be related to Martha; however, he is given a chance to make the superstitious testimony against Martha. The law advocates for a fair trial, where facts are presented and proved beyond reasonable doubts against the accused before the final verdict is made. Wrongful and delusional confessions cannot be used as evidence for execution in court. If Allin Toothaker suffered injuries in war, he was supposed to seek medical treatment and follow the doctor’s guidelines to recover.
Including third parties and family members during court trials demonstrate unequivocally that the trial was unjust and unfair. As an illustration, when Martha Carrier was charged with witchcraft, her kids were also named as suspects. Many of those who testified against Martha accused her maliciously including in loss and sickness of animals. For instance, John Rogger testified against Martha for having bewitched his cattle (MATHER). Equally, Samuel Preston accused that two years ago, after Martha Bewitched his cows, they got lost successively after a difference with Martha. The accusations are wrong from many angles; the argument one can raise why did the cows wait for two years to disappear after Martha bewitched them? Secondly, why would they get lost at different times if they were all bewitched simultaneously? Answering these questions highlights the unjust nature of the testimony as it holds no water and cannot link Martha to the disappearance of the cows. The vital concern here in this testimony is, is Martha being accused as a thief or a witch? The accused can only be one person at a time; if she and the family are thieves, then they should be charged with that. If the cows are lost out of the owner’s ignorance, Martha has nothing to do with that. The constitution provides a framework for property ownership; the same laws charge the individual owner with the responsibility of taking care of their property.
The wrongful accusation is an unjust practice, however much the community consent to it. Witchcraft is not allowed in Salem, and this does not make it right to accuse anyone falsely and subsequently subject them to torture, maiming, or death. A just society guarantees the accused the right of attorney and presumption of innocence till proven guilty. The argument here is that witch trials’ practices are unjust and should not be unanimously consented to by the Salem community. Additionally, the study concludes that the accused in the Salem Witch Trials were not given a fair and just trial because the judges and prosecutors who presided over the case did not follow the correct procedure when determining a verdict. Even though there was no hard evidence to back up the accusation, the case was built on assumptions. It also demonstrates that there was no justice for the accused and that family member, including children. This indicates that there was no justice for the accused.
Works Cited
MATHER, C. WONDERS OF THE INVISIBLE WORLD: THE TRIAL OF MARTHA CARRIER AT THE COURT OF OYER AND TERMINER, SALEM, AUGUST 2, 1692. The Open Anthology of Earlier American Literature, 278.
write