I think we all found the witch trial storylines of 1795 and 1840 to be ridiculous. A hundred years and more after Salem, who would try anyone for witchcraft? However, after completeing America Bewitched by Owen Davies, I'm wondering if perhaps we haven't been a little too hard on the show's writers.
Davies's book is a highly comprehensive study of witchcraft beliefs in America post-1692 (at times, in fact, it feels oversaturated with detail). The author examines the superstitions, folk customs and religious notions of European immigrants, African Americans, and Native Americans as they relate to witches and witchcraft, as well as documented accusations of witchcraft, and assassinations of suspected witches. Of particular interest, Davies writes about laws dealing with witchcraft.
A particular English common law statute from 1604 prescribed the death penalty for the practice of witchcraft and conjuration. This law was also adopted within the colonies. Although the law was repealed in England in 1736, it remained in force in America well after the Revolution and even after the Constitution had been ratified. In rural areas especially, justices of the peace continued to practice from outdated law books. In other instances, the law simply wasn't repealed due to negligence.
For example, Davies recounts the story of one couple from Cumberland County in Massachussetts, now modern-day Maine, who were accused and brought to court in 1787. The judge had to inform the jury that, "Regrettably, the old statute aginst witchcraft [1604 death penalty law for witchcraft and conjuration] remained unrepealed and was therefore still in force."
A suspected witch was assualted by a mob in the County of York (modern Maine) in 1796.
A reporter for the New Bedford Mercury Northern Tribune writing in 1847 expressed his astonishment that anybody in America could still believe in witchcraft in the present day and age. He referenced a witchcraft court case that had occurred in Maine a few years earlier (Quentin's case, perhaps?) as the source of his surprise.
The latest witchcraft case the author mentions occurred in 1950 in Connecticut.
Most witchcraft cases were dismissed, or the charges was converted to nuisance/fraud (as in the 1950 Connecticut matter). Interestingly, revised laws post-1736 targeted self-proclaimed practitioners claiming to tell the future or cure or curse through magic. (e.g., If Quentin were to boast that he was a warlock and had used a spell to kill Mordecai Grimes's cattle, he could be brought before the court as a humbug, but Mordecai would have no legal grounds for accusing Quentin of witchery.
In light of the anecdotes in this highly informative book, it seems more plausible that Vicki and Quentin could have been brought to trial for witchcraft (though it's still far-fetched that they would face judicial execution). I wonder if the DS writers were aware of the history of post-colonial witchcraft trials in Maine, or if they were just flying by the seat of their pants and got lucky.
Happy Halloween!
ProfStokes
