Tag: Richard Carrier

By Posted on Posted in Genealogy, History Tagged with , , , , , , , , , ,

For almost 10 years, Thomas Carrier lived unobtrusively in Billerica, Massachusetts. And then he met Martha—and his life dramatically changed.

In May 1674, 47-year-old “Thomas Carrier, vulgarly called Thomas Morgan, of Billerikey” confessed to fornication with Martha Allen, daughter of Andrew Allen of Andover, in the Middlesex Court. Old Mrs. Johnson, midwife of Woburn, admitted she examined Martha, while Elizabeth Chamberlain, George Chamberlain, and John Drinker served as witnesses. The couple married and their first child Richard was born two months later.

Settling into married life was a struggle though. Before Richard’s second birthday, “the [Billerica] selectman ordered the constable to give notice to Thomas Carrier, alias Morgan, Welchman, that the town was not willing he should abide here, as an inhabitant, and that he forthwith depart with his family, or give such security as shall be to the content of the selectmen on peril of 20 shillings per week, while he abide without leave, first had and obtained, which is according to the ancient town order amongst us.” The Carriers remained in town.

In the fall of 1677, their prospects improved. Thomas and his man were assigned to cut brush in the southeast part of Billerica. The following February, he took the oath of fidelity to the government of Massachusetts Bay Colony. In 1679, Thomas paid the third highest taxes (9 shillings) in Billerica after Captain Jonathan Danforth (9 s. 10 d.) and Job Lane (13 s.).

Their family grew. With two teenage boys (Richard, b. 1674; Andrew, b. 1677), three children under 9 (Thomas, b. 1682; Sarah, b. 1684; Hannah, b. 1689), and one infant buried (Jane, b. 1680), life was hard. Thomas didn’t have any relatives in Massachusetts Bay. Martha’s sister Mary, who also lived in Billerica, had “many things amiss in [her] family,” according to the selectmen, and her husband, Dr. Roger Toothaker, had a habit of wandering off and forgetting about his family. Plus Martha’s parents, Andrew and Faith (Ingalls) Allen of Andover, were getting older.

The Carriers moved to Andover in the summer or early fall of 1690. Although Martha grew up in the town, the Andover selectmen “took care when [the Carriers] first came to town to warn them out again and have attended the law therein.” (A “warning out” gave notice that the town would not be held liable for their support, even if the family remained in town.)

By mid-October Martha “and some of her children [were] smitten with that contagious disease, the smallpox.” In a notice dated 14 October 1690 and sent to Samuel Holt, Andrew Allen, and John Allen, the selectmen wanted to make sure the Carriers “do not spread the distemper with wicked carelessness, which we are afraid they have already done: You had best take what care you can about them, nature and religion requiring it.”

On 4 November 1690, the selectmen wrote to Walter Wright, constable: “Whereas it has pleased God to visit those of the widow Allen’s family which she hath taken into her house with that contagious disease the smallpox, it being as we think part of our duty to prevent the spreading of said distemper we therefore require you in their Majesties’ names to warn said family not to go near any house so as to endanger them by said infection nor to come to the public meeting till they may come with safety to others: but what they want let them acquaint you with: which provide for them out of their own estates.”

The Carriers survived smallpox. Unfortunately, Martha’s Allen-Ingalls family was not so lucky. All 10 people who died of the disease in Andover* were related to Martha:

  • 24 Oct. 1690: Andrew Allen Sr., Martha’s father
  • 26 Nov. 1690: Andrew Allen Jr., Martha’s brother
  • 26 Nov. 1690: John Allen, Martha’s brother
  • 9 Dec. 1690: Francis Ingalls, Martha’s cousin
  • 13 Dec. 1690: James Holt, Martha’s sister Hannah’s son
  • 14 Dec. 1690: James Holt, Martha’s sister Hannah’s husband
  • 18 Dec. 1690: Thomas Allen, Martha’s brother Andrew’s son
  • 22 Dec. 1690: Sarah (Holt) Marks, sister of Martha’s two Holt brothers-in-law
  • 25 Dec. 1690: Mercy (Peters) Allen, Martha’s brother John’s widow
  • 15 Jan. 1690/1: Stephen Osgood, Martha’s uncle Henry Ingalls’ brother-in-law

The townspeople may have wondered how Martha could survive smallpox when it killed her father, two brothers, two nephews, and five close relations. They may not have known the virus spread through coughing or sneezing as well as touching clothing or bedding that comes in contact with the sores. Nursing the sick—as “nature and religion” required—put the entire household at risk. But that’s what families do.

Fortunately, by isolating the Carriers and their kin, the selectmen kept smallpox from spreading throughout Andover. Yet it’s clear they blamed Martha Carrier for bringing the deadly disease to Andover. Records, however, show the three smallpox deaths in Billerica happened late in December 1690, months after the Carriers left. Two of those deaths were the brother and niece of John Rogers’ first wife, Mary Shedd (1647-1688).

Not surprisingly, when rumors of witchcraft swirled in Andover, people looked suspiciously at Martha Carrier.

In 1692, John Rogers of Billerica deposed against Martha Carrier, claiming seven years prior his three cows went missing or stopped providing milk. Why? He said, “Martha Carrier was the occasion of those ill accidents by means of witchcraft, [she] being a very malicious woman.” He didn’t mention smallpox.

On 19 August 1692, Martha (Allen) Carrier was executed for witchcraft in Salem, Massachusetts. She was not a witch.

*A few other deaths may be attributed to smallpox but are not labeled as such in the Andover vital records. No data exists for how many Andover residents had smallpox and survived.

For more about Martha (Allen) Carrier, I highly recommend the historical novel The Heretic’s Daughter by Kathleen Kent.

Notes:

See also: Smallpox in Massachusetts Bay 1689-1692 (my blog at Genealogy Ink)

By Posted on Posted in History Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

When the witch hunt started in Salem Village in February 1692, the Massachusetts colonists were waiting for Rev. Increase Mather to return home from England with a new governor, Sir William Phips, and joint monarchs William & Mary’s new charter. In the interim, four magistrates held examinations (hearings) to see if any of the accused should be held for trial. The jails in Salem, Boston, Ipswich, and elsewhere were filled with accused witches when Governor Phips arrived in May 1692. In short order, he established the special Court of Oyer and Terminer to handle the witchcraft cases, before heading northward to handle military issues with the Native Americans.

Led by Lieutenant Governor William Stoughton, the Salem court had an imposing job set before them: Discover witches during unruly public meetings filled with afflicted accusers, scared or disbelieving townspeople, and bewildering stories of possession, strange occurrences, unexplained deaths, animal familiars, black Sabbaths, and the like.

Following the Rules?

In December 1641, the Massachusetts Bay Colony published the Body of Liberties. These 100 rules, which were based on both English law and Biblical law, were intended to be the foundation of the colony’s court system.

Under rule 94, Capital Laws, number 2 it says:

“If any man or woman be a witch, that is, hath or consulteth with a familiar spirit, they shall be put to death.”

Deuteronomy 18:10-11 had a much larger definition: “There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.” But the Salem judges specifically were looking for Sarah Good’s yellow bird or Bridget Bishop’s cat.

So, let’s look at some of the other legal points and see how they pertained to the Salem witch trials.

26. Any man that findeth himself unfit to plead his own cause in any Court, shall have the liberty to employ any man against whom the Court doth not except, to help him provided he give him no fee or reward for his pains. This shall not except the party himself from answering such questions in person as the Court shall think meet to demand of him.

On 9 September 1692, sisters Sarah (Towne) Cloyce and Mary (Towne) Estey petitioned the court to allow testimony on their behalf, “seeing we are neither able to plead our own cause, nor is council allowed to those in our condition” (Records of the Salem Witch-Hunt, p. 620). These two eloquent women were fit to plead their cases, but clearly were not allowed to in the Salem court. They had no defense attorney and the judges were acting as prosecutors.

45. No man shall be forced by torture to confess any crime against himself nor any other unless it be in some capital case where he is first fully convicted by clear and sufficient evidence to be guilty. After which, if the cause be of that nature, that it is very apparent that there be other conspirators or confederates with him, then he may be tortured, yet not with such tortures as be barbarous and inhumane.

According to accused witch John Proctor, 18-year-old Richard Carrier and his 16-year-old brother Andrew Carrier, “would not confess anything till they tied them neck and heels till the blood was ready to come out of their noses” (Robert Calef, More Wonders of the Invisible World, 1700). The Carrier brothers had not even been indicted, much less been charged guilty before being tortured.

46. For bodily punishments we allow amongst us none that are inhumane, barbarous, or cruel.

It goes without saying that peine forte et dure, or being pressed to death like Giles Corey, is “inhumane, barbarous, or cruel.” Once the rocks were placed on his prone form, even if the 70-year-old Corey changed his mind and started talking, he’d probably die from the internal injuries anyway. It took him hours to die.

47. No man shall be put to death without the testimony of two or three witnesses, or that which is equivalent thereunto.

Since witchcraft meant being in league with the Devil, it’s surprising that the justices did not rely on the opinion of several prominent ministers who were against using spectral evidence—visions seen only by the afflicted accusers—as the main reason to charge a person. Nor did the justices find conflict in accepting the words, visions, and bodily contortions of the afflicted accusers that one could say were possessed by the Devil themselves. The afflicted accusers often supported each other’s testimonies or mimicked each other during the trials. The people in the court house became witnesses of the afflicted accusers.

Confessed witches sometimes claimed to have seen other accused witches at witch meetings. Since the court was using confessors to find more witches, the confessors were spared until a later date (that never came). In most circumstances, confessing to a crime was as good as or better than having two witnesses. Yet none of the confessors were hanged before Governor Phips stopped the trials.

94 Capital 11. If any man rise up by false witness, wittingly and of purpose to take away any man’s life, he shall be put to death.

After the trials were over, we don’t hear much backlash against the accusers or the judges and jury. Some disappear from the records, while others, such as Judge Stoughton, continued to be prominent members of society. However, Judge Samuel Sewall, numerous jurymen, and accuser Ann Putnam Jr. publicly asked for forgiveness for their part in the trials.

reposted from Genealogy Ink