Stories_, 21-34. The
pamphlet about Dr. Fian is a rare one, but may be found in several
libraries. It has been reprinted by the _Gentleman's Magazine_, vol.
XLIX (1779), by the Roxburghe Club (London, 1816), by Robert Pitcairn,
in his _Criminal Trials in Scotland_ (Edinburgh, 1829-1833), vol. I, and
doubtless in many other places. Pitcairn has also printed a part of the
records of his trial.
[2] This is all based upon the contemporary accounts mentioned above.
[3] _Register of the Privy Council of Scotland_, IV (Edinburgh, 1881),
644-645, note.
[4] A fresh edition was brought out at London in 1603. In 1616 it
appeared again as a part of the handsome collection of his _Workes_
compiled by the Bishop of Winchester.
[5] This story is to be found in the apocryphal book of Bel and the
Dragon. It played a great part in the discussions of the writers on
witchcraft.
[6] H. C. Lea, _Superstition and Force_ (4th ed., Philadelphia, 1892),
325 ff., gives some facts about the water ordeal on the Continent. A
sharp dispute over its use in witch cases was just at this time going on
there.
[7] He recommended torture in finding out the guilty: "And further
experience daily proves how loth they are to confesse without torture,
which witnesseth their guiltinesse," _Daemonologie_, bk. ii, ch. i.
[8] Wright, _Narratives of Sorcery and Magic_, I, 197.
[9] Edward Fairfax, _A Discourse of Witchcraft As it was acted in the
Family of Mr. Edward Fairfax ... in the year 1621_ (Philobiblon Soc.,
_Miscellanies_, V, ed. R. Monckton Milnes, London, 1858-1859), "Preface
to the Reader," 26, explains the king's motive: His "Majesty found a
defect in the statutes, ... by which none died for Witchcraft but they
only who by that means killed, so that such were executed rather as
murderers than as Witches."
[10] _Journals of the House of Lords_, II, 269; Wm. Cobbett,
_Parliamentary History_, I, 1017, 1018.
[11] _Lords' Journal_, II, 271, 316; _Commons' Journal_, I, 203-204.
[12] _Cal. St. P., Dom., 1603-1610_, 117.
[13] It had passed the third reading in the Commons on June 7; _Commons'
Journal_, I, 234.
[14] It can hardly be doubted that the change in the wording of the law
was dictated not only by the desire to simplify the matter of proof but
by a wish to satisfy those theologians who urged that any use of
witchcraft was a "covenant with death" and "an agreement with hell"
(Isaiah xxviii, 18).
[15] See Southworth case in T
|