at they
professed to have great regard for those writers; but it is also true,
that neither Mather nor the other Ministers in 1692, adopted the
conclusion which the Reviewer allows to be inevitably demanded by sound
reason and common sense, namely, that "no spectral evidence must be
admitted." On the contrary, they did authorize the "admission" of
spectral evidence. This I propose to prove; and if I succeed in doing
it, the whole fabric of the article in the _North American Review_ falls
to the ground.

It is necessary, at this point, to say a word as to the _Mather Papers_.
They were published by a Committee of the Massachusetts Historical
Society, in 1868. My work was published in 1867. The Reviewer, and
certain journals that have committed themselves to his support, charge
me with great negligence in not having consulted those papers, _not then
in print_. Upon inquiry, while making my researches, I was informed, by
those having them in hand preparatory to their going to press, that they
contained nothing at all essential to my work; and the information was
correct. Upon examining the printed volume, I cannot find a single item
that would require an alteration, addition, or omission to be made in my
work. But they are quite serviceable in the discussion to which the
article in the _North American Review_ compels me.

To return to the issue framed by the Reviewer. He makes a certain
absolute assertion, repeats it in various forms, and confidently assumes
it, all the way through, as in these passages: "Stoughton admitted
spectral evidence; Mather, in his writings on the subject, denounced it,
as illegal, uncharitable, and cruel." "He ever testified against it,
both publicly and privately; and, particularly in his Letter to the
Judges, he besought them that they would by no means admit it; and when
a considerable assembly of Ministers gave in their _Advice_ about the
matter, he not only concurred with the advice, but he drew it up." "The
_Advice_ was very specific in excluding spectral testimony."

He relies, in the first place, and I may say chiefly, in maintaining
this position--namely, that Mather denounced the _admission_ of spectral
testimony and demanded its _exclusion_--upon a sentence in a letter from
Cotton Mather to John Richards, called by the Reviewer "his Letter to
the Judges," among the _Mather Papers_, p. 891.

Hutchinson informs us that Richards came into the country in low
circumstances, but became a