ches.

_Dorothy Durent_ was the mother of William Durent, an infant. She swore
that on the 10th of March 1669, she left her son William, who was then
sucking, in charge of Amy Durent while she was away from home, giving
her a penny for her trouble. She laid a great charge on Amy not to
suckle the child, and on being asked why she did this, she explained
that Amy had long gone under the reputation of a witch. Nevertheless,
when she came back Amy told her that she had given the child suck;--

whereupon the deponent was very angry with the said Amy for the
same; at which the said Amy was much discontented, and used many
high expressions and threatening speeches towards her; telling
her, That she had as good to have done otherwise than to have
found fault with her, and so departed out of her house; and that
very night her son fell into strange fits of swooning and was
held in such terrible manner, that she was much affrighted
therewith, and so continued for divers weeks. And the said
examinant farther said, that she being exceedingly troubled at
her child's distemper, did go to a certain person named Dr.
Jacob, who lived at Yarmouth, who had the reputation in the
country, to help children that were bewitched; who advised her
to hang up the child's blanket in the chimney-corner all day,
and at night when she put the child to bed, to put it into the
said blanket, and if she found anything in it, she should not be
afraid, but throw it into the fire. And this deponent did
according to his direction, and at night when she took down the
blanket with an intent to put her child therein, there fell out
of the same a great toad, which ran up and down the hearth, and
she having a young youth only with her in the house desired him
to catch the toad and throw it into the fire, which the youth
did accordingly and held it there with the tongs; and as soon as
it was in the fire it made a great and horrible noise, and after
a space there was a flashing in the fire like gunpowder, making
a noise like the discharge of a pistol, and thereupon the toad
was no more seen or heard. It was asked by the court, if that
after the noise and flashing, there was not the substance of the
toad to be seen to consume in the fire? And it was answered by
the said Dorothy Durent, that after the flashing and noise,
there was no more seen than