Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Warrant for jurors for the Court of Oyer and Terminer In order to try the accused, newly-commissioned governor of Massachusetts Bay William Phips established a court of Oyer and Terminer on May 27, 1692, presided over by Lt. Governor William Stoughton and a group of justices. In addition to forcing the accused to defend themselves without representation, Stoughton controversially allowed the admission of “spectral evidence” into the proceedings, much of which was used to convict the accused. The Court of Oyer and Terminer oversaw the most active period of the Salem Witch Trials, and all of the arrests and executions occurred under this court. In October of 1692, Governor Phips grew so dissatisfied with the outcome of the Trials, partially due to the accusation of his own wife, that he prohibited further arrests, released many of the accused, and dissolved the Court of Oyer and Terminer. The court was replaced with the Superior Court of Assizes and General Gaole Delivery, also presided over by Stoughton, until he ordered the execution of all of the women whose sentences had been postponed due to their pregnancies. Phips blocked this order, causing Stoughton to resign from the Court. Crucially, the new Court did not allow spectral evidence, significantly decreasing the conviction rate and convincing Phips to end the Trials entirely by mid-1693. Next 

Summary of Evidence v. Sarah Good This document contains examples of how spectral evidence was used in the Court of Oyer and Terminer— in this case, against Sarah Good. Spectral evidence, one of the most controversial aspects of the Salem Witch Trials, was anything admitted in court based on a person’s visions, often describing their encounter with a witch or the Devil. Given that it is based on intangible information, spectral evidence was practically impossible to defend against, and while some of the accused were also charged based on feats of strength, witch’s marks, or “ordinary witchcrafts,” nearly eighty accused were tried based on spectral evidence alone. When spectral evidence was prohibited from the second round of trials, the rate of convictions significantly dropped.  Prev | Next 

Examination of Bridget Bishop, as recorded by Samuel Parris The Salem Witch Trials formally began when Bridget Bishop was brought before the Court of Oyer and Terminer on June 2, 1692. Accused of bewitching 5 young women, including Abigail Williams and Ann Putnam Jr., Bishop was forced to defend herself against at least 10 testimonies over the course of 8 days. According to Cotton Mather, several Salem residents testified that the shape of Bishop would pinch, choke, and bite them, and one was threatened with drowning. Mather also reported that Bishop continued to curse her accusers in court, and only her touch could revive them. As recorded in this document by Samuel Parris, Bishop testified that she did not know any of her accusers and she had never been to the places they claimed to have seen her. Historians consider this to be possible because Bishop was a resident of Salem Town and the accusers lived 5 to 7 miles away in Salem Village. Furthermore, Bridget Bishop, who ran a tavern in Salem Town with her husband, was likely confused with a Sarah Bishop Wildes who ran a tavern with her husband in Salem Village. Despite this confusion and the questionable validity of the aforementioned testimonies, the court believed that Bishop was lying, and she was ultimately found guilty and sentenced to death.  Prev | Next 

Physical examinations no. 1 and no. 2 of Bridget Bishop, Rebecca Nurse, Elizabeth Proctor, Alice Parker, Susanna Martin, and Sarah Good In addition to interrogations, the accused were subjected to physical examinations in search of devil’s or witch’s marks. While thought to be markings representing the moment the Devil turned the accused into witches by drinking their blood, marks such as birth marks, moles, scars, bug bites, or any other natural features were all identified as witch’s marks and used to convict the accused. In some cases, the lack of witch’s marks was ignored, and the accused were convicted regardless.  Prev