AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE jurymen OF ENGLAND, Touching Witches. TOGETHER WITH A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN An ENGLISH AND HEBREW witch.  
LONDON, Printed by I. G. for Richard Royston, At the Angel in Ivy-lane, 1653.   

ADVERTISEMENT TO THE jurymen, OF ENGLAND.  
THe late Execution of Witches, at the Summer assizes in Kent, occasioned this brief Exercitation, which addresses itself to such as have not deliberately thought upon the great difficulty in discovering, what, or who a Witch is. To have nothing but the public faith of the present Age, is none of the best evidence, unless the universality of Elder times do concur with these Doctrines, which ignorance in the times of darkness brought forth, and credulity in these days of light hath continued.  
Such as shall not be pleased with this Tractate, are left to their liberty to consider, whether all those Proofs and Presumptions numbered up by Mr. Perkins, for the Conviction of a Witch, be not all condemned, or confessed by himself to be unsufficient, or uncertain.  
He brings no less than eighteen signs, or proofs whereby a witch may be discovered; Which are too many to be all true: His seven first he himself confesseth to be insufficient for conviction of a witch; His eight next proofs (which he saith, men in place have used) he acknowledgeth to be false or insufficient. Thus of his eighteen proofs, which made a great show, fourteen of them are cast off by himself; there remains then his sixteenth, which is the confession of a Witch, yet presently he is forced to yield that a bare confession is not a sufficient proof, and so he cometh to his seaventeenth proof, which is, two credible witnesses, and he here grants that the league between the devil, and the Witch is closely made, and the practices of Witches be very secret, that hardly a Man can be brought, which upon his own knowledge can aver such things. Therefore at last when all other proofs fail, he is forced to fly to his eighteenth proof, and tells us, that yet there is a way to come to the knowledge of a Witch, which is, that Satan useth all means to discover a Witch; which how it can be well done, except the devil be bound over to give in evidence against the Witch, cannot be understood.  
And as Mr. Perkins weakens, and discredits all his own proofs, so he doth the like for all those of K. James, who as I remember hath but 3. Arguments for the discovery of a witch. First, The secret mark of a witch, of which M. Perkins saith, it hath no power by God's Ordinance. Secondly, The discovery by a fellow-witch, this Mr. Perkins by no means will allow to be a good proof. Thirdly, the swimming of a witch, who is to be flung cross ways into the water, that is, as Wierus interprets it, when the Thumb of the right hand is bound to the great Toe of the left Foot, and the Thumb of the left Hand, to the great Toe of the right Foot: against this trial by water, together with a disability in a witch to shed Tears (which K. James mentions) Delrio, and Mr. Perkins both argue, for it seems they both write after K. James, who put forth his Book of daemonology in his Youth, being in Scotland, about his age of thirty years.  
It concerns the People of this Nation to be more diligently instructed, in the Doctrine of witchcraft, than those of foreign Countries, because here they are tied to a stricter or exacter Rule in giving their sentence, than others are; for all of them must agree in their Verdict, which in a case of extreme difficulty is very dangerous, and it is a sad thing for Men to be reduced to that extremity, that they must hazard their Consciences, or their lives.   

Errata.  
PAge 12. l. 32. for they have, read it hath. p. 3. l. 5. for these, read those. p. 5. l. 3. for egrinus read egimus.   

A DIFFERENCE between An ENGLISH AND HEBREW witch.  
THe Point in Question is briefly this; whether such a Witch as is condemned by the laws, and Statutes of this Land, be one and the same with the Witch forbidden by the Law of Moses.  
The Witch condemned by our Statute-law is,  1 JACOB. CAP. 12. 
One that shall use, practice, or exercise any invocation or conjuration of any evil or wicked spirit, or consult, covenant with, entertain or employ, feed or reward any evil or wicked spirit, to, or for any intent or purpose; or take up any dead man, woman, or child, out of his, her, or their grave, or any other place, where the dead body resteth, or the skin, bone, or other part of any dead person, to be employed or used in any manner of Witchcraft, Sorcery, charm or Enchantment; or shall use, practice, or exercise any Witchcraft, Enchantment, charm, or Sorcery, whereby any person shall be killed, destroyed, wasted, consumed, pined, or lamed in his, or her body, or any part thereof. Such offenders duly and lawfully convicted and attainted, shall suffer death.  
If any person shall take upon him by Witchcraft, enchantment, charm, or Sorcery, to tell or declare in what place any treasure of Gold, or Silver, should or might be found, or had in the Earth, or other secret places, or where Goods, or things lost or stolen should be found or become: Or to the intent, to provoke any person to unlawful love, or whereby any cattle or Goods of any person shall be destroyed, wasted, or impaired, or to destroy or hurt any person, in his, or her body, though the same be not effected, &c. a years Imprisonment, and Pillory, &c. and the second conviction, death.  

In this Statute these Points are Observable.  
1. That this Statute was first framed in 5. Eliz. and only the penalties here a little altered, and the last clause concerning provoking of persons to love, and destroying of Cattle, and Goods, &c. is so changed, that I cannot well make sense of it, except it be rectified according to the words of the former Statute which stands repealed.  
2. Although the Statute runs altogether in the disjunctive Or, and so makes every single crime capital, yet the Judges usually by a favourable interpretation take the disjunctive Or for the copulative And; and therefore ordinarily they condemn none for Witches, unless they be charged with the Murdering of some person.  
3. This Statute presupposeth that every one knows what a Conjurer, a Witch, an enchanter, a Charmer, and Sorcerer is, as being to be learned best of Divines; and therefore they have not described, or distinguished between them: and yet the Law is very just in requiring a due and lawful conviction.   

The definition of witchcraft.  
FOr the better discovery of the qualities of these crimes, I shall spend some discourse upon the Definition of these arts by Divines, for both those of the reformed Churches, as well as these of the Roman in a manner, agree in their Definition of the sin of witchcraft. I shall instance in two late Writers, viz. Mr. W. Perkins in his Discourse of witchcraft, and in Martin Delrie a Jusuit of Lorraine in his book of magical disquisitions.  
Our English word Witch is derived from the Dutch word, Witchelen, or Wijchelen, which doth properly signify whinying o●neying like a Horse, and doth also signify to foretell, or prophecy; and Weicheler signifies a South sayer, for that the Germans from whom our Ancestors the Saxons descended usually, and principally did as Tacitus tells us, Divine and foretell things to come by the whinying, and neighing of their horses, Hinitu & fremitu are his words.  

Cap. 1.  For the Definition Mr. Perkins saith, Witch craft is an Art serving for the working of Wonders, by the assistance of the devil, so far as God shall permit.  

Lib. 1. c. 2.  Delrio defineth it to be an Art which by the power of a contract, entered into with the devil, some wonders are wrought which pass the common understanding of men. Ars qua vi pacti cum Daemonibus initi mira quaedam communem hominum captum superantia officiuntur.  
In these two Definitions, some Points are worth the noting.  
1. They both agree in the main Foundation, which is a Contract with the devil, and therefore Mr. Perkins thought it most necessary, that this main point should be proved, to which purpose he promiseth to define a Witch, by opening the nature of Witchcraft, 
Cap. 2.  as it is delivered in the Old and new Testament, and yet after he confesseth a manifest Covenant is not so fully set down in Scripture; 
Cap. 2.  And out of the New Testament he offers no proof at all, though he promised it, nevertheless he resolves us that a Covenant is a most evident and certain truth, that may not be called in question.  
For proof of a Covenant he produceth only one Text out of the old Testament, neither doth he say, that the Text proveth a Contract with the devil, but only that it intimateth so much; Thus at the first he falls from a proof to an intimation only. 
Cap. 2.  The Text is Psal. 58. ver. 5. of which his words are these, howsoever the common translation runeth in other terms, yet the words are properly to be read thus; which heareth not the voice of the mutterer joining Societies cunningly— the main Foundation of the charm Societies or Confederacies cunningly made not between man and man, but as the words import between the Enchanter and the Devil devit. 18. 11.  
Answer. Though there be neither mention of Spirit, or devil in this psalm, yet Mr. Perkins would have us believe that there can be no conjoining or consociating but with the devil: But Mr. Ainsworth as great a rabbi as Mr. Perkins, finds other interpretations of this Text, and though he mentions fellowship with the devil, yet he puts it in the third and last place as the newest and latest interpretation; for he teacheth us that the Enchanter had his title both in psalm 58. and in Deut. 18. either because he associates Serpents, making them tame and familiar that they hurt not, or because such persons use to bind and tie bonds, or things about the body to heal or hurt by Sorcery; also he teacheth us that a Charmer doth join, or speak words of a strange language, and without sense, &c.  
Delrio, it seems puts no confidence in this Text of Mr. Perkins, for he doth not cite it to prove a Contract, yet he hath also one Text of his own to that purpose, 
Lib. 2 Qu. 4.  it is Esay 28. 15. where it is said, we have made a Covenant with Death, and with Hell we are at an agreement, percussimus faedus cum morte, & cum inferno fecimus pactum, and Delrio tells us that Tho Aquinas did apply this Text to Witches▪ magis satis probabili interpretatione.  
Answ. If this Text be considered, it proves nothing at all, for it doth not charge the proud and drunken Ephramites, of whom it is spoken that they had made any agreement with Hell, but it is only a false brag of their own to justify their wickedness by a lie; for it is not possible to make a Covenant with Death, which in itself is nothing but a mere not being; and whereas it is called an agreement with Hell, it may be translated as well, if not better in this place an agreement with the Grave, and so the interlineary Bible hath it, and Tnemelius and Junius render it pepigimus faedus cum morte, & cum sepulcro egrinus cautum, which they term a thrasonical hyperbole, and Deodatus his Italian Bible hath habbiamo fatto lega col sepolero, so likewise the Spanish Bible translates it, concierto tenemos hecho con la muerte, è con la sepultura hazimos acuerdo.  
It may be wondered that neither Mr. Perkins nor the Jesuit have any other, or better Texts to prove this Contract between the Witch and the devil. But the truth is it is very little that either of them say of this great point, but pass it over perfunctorily. Perhaps it may be thought that King James hath said, or brought more and better proofs in this point; but I do not find that he doth meddle with it at all, but takes it for granted that if there be Witches, there must needs be a Covenant, and so leaves it without further proof.  
A second note is that the agreement between the Witch, and the devil they call a Covenant, and yet neither of the parties are any way bound to perform their part, and the devil without doubt notwithstanding all his craft hath far the worst part of the bargain. 
Cap. 11.  The bargain runs thus in Mr. P. the Witch as a slave binds himself by Vow to believe in the devil, and to give him either Body, or soul, or both under his hand Writing, or some part of his blood. The devil promiseth to be ready at his vassals command to appear in the likeness of any Creature, to consult, and to aid him for the procuring of Pleasure, Honour, Wealth, or Preferment, to go for him, to carry him any whither, and do any command. Whereby we see the devil is not to have benefit of his bargain till the Death of the Witch, in the mean time he is to appear always at the Witches command, to go for him, to carry him any whither, and to do any command, which argues the devil to be the Witches slave▪ and not the Witch the devils.  
Though it be true which Delrio affirmeth, that the devil is at liberty to perform or break his compact, for that not man can compel him to keep his promise; yet on the other side it is as possible for the Witch to frustrate the devil's Contract, if he or she have so much grace as to repent, the which there may be good cause to do, if the devil be found not to perform his promise: Besides a Witch may many times require that to be done by the devil, which God permits not the devil to do; thus against his will the devil may lose his credit, and give occasion of repentance though he endeavour to the utmost of his power to bring to pass whatsoever he hath promised, and so fail of the benefit of his bargain, though he have the hand-writing, or some part of the blood of the Witch for his security, or the solemnity before witnesses as Delrio imagineth.  
I am certain they will not say that witchcraft is like the sin against the Holy Ghost, unpardonable, for Mr. Perkins confesseth the contrary, 
Lib. 5. Sect. 18.  and Delrio denies it not, for he allows the Sacrament of the Eucharist to be administered to a condemned Witch, with this limitation, that there may be about four hours' space between the Communion, and the Execution, in which time it may be probably thought that the sacramental Species (as they call it) may be consumed.  
3. Delrio in his second book, and fourth Question gives this rule, which he saith, is common to all Contracts with the devil, that first they must deny the Faith, and Christianism, and Obedience to God, and reject the patronage of the Virgin Mary, and revile her. To the same purpose Mr. Perkins affirms that Witches renounce God and their baptism. But if this be common to all Contracts with the devil, it will follow that none can be Witches but such as have first been Christians, nay and Roman Catholics, if Delrio say true, for who else can renounce the patronage of the Virgin Mary? And what shall be said then of all those Idolatrous Nations of Lapland, Finland, and of divers parts of Africa, and many other Heathenish Nations which our travellers report to be full of Witches? And indeed what need or benefit can the devil gain by contracting with those Idolaters, who are surer his own, than any Covenant can make them?  
4. Whereas it is said that Witch craft is an Art working wonders, it must be understood that the art must be the Witches Art, and not the devils, otherwise it is no witchcraft, but Devils-craft: It is confessed on all hands that the Witch doth not work the wonder, but the devil only. It is a rare Art for a Witch by her Art to be able to do nothing herself, but to command an other to practise the Art. In other Arts Mr. Perkins confesseth, 
Cap. 1. Sect. 4.  that the Arts Master is able by himself to practise his Art, and to do things belonging thereunto without the help of an other, but in this it is otherwise— the power of effecting strange works doth not flow from the skill of the Witch, but is derived wholly from Satan. 
Cap. 4. Sect. 1.  To the same purpose he saith, that the means of working wonders are charms used as a watchword to the devil to cause him to work wonders: so that the devil is the worker of the wonder, and the Witch but the Counsellor, persuader, or Commander of it, and only accessary before the Fact, and the devil only principal. Now the difficulty will be how the accessary can be duly and lawfully convicted and attainted according as our Statute requires, unless the devil who is the principal be first convicted, or at least outlawed, which cannot be, because the devil can never be lawfully summoned according to the rules of our Common-law. For further proof that the devil is the principal in all such wonders, I shall show it by the testimony of King James, in a case of murder, which is the most capital crime our laws look upon. First he tells that the devil teaches Witches how to make Pictures of Wax and Clay, that by the resting thereof the persons that they bear the Name of, may be continually melted or dried away by continual sickness— not that any of these means which he teacheth them (except poisons which are composed of things natural) can of themselves help any thing to these turns they are employed in. 
Lib. 2. Cap. 5.  Secondly, King James affirms that Witches can bewitch, and take the life of Men, or Women by roasting of the Pictures, which is very possible to their Master to perform, for although that instrument of Wax have no virtue in the turn doing: yet may be not very well by that same measure that his conjured Slave melts that Wax at the fire, may he not I say at these same times subtilely as a spirit, so weaken and scatter the spirits of life of the patient, as may make him on the one part for faintness to sweat out the humours of his body; and on the other part for the not concurring of these spirits which cause his digestion, so debilitate his stomach that his humour radical continually sweating out on the one part, and no new good Suck being put in the place thereof, for lack of digestion on the other, he at last shall vanish away even as his Picture will do at the Fire. Here we see the Picture of Wax roasted by the Witch, hath no virtue in the Murdering, but the devil only. It is necessary in the first place that it be duly proved that the party murdered be murdered by the devil, for it is a shame to belie the devil, and it is not possible to be proved if it be Subtilely done as a spirit.  
5. Our Definers of witchcraft dispute much, whether the devil can work a Miracle, they resolve he can do a wonder, but not a Miracle, Mirum but not Miraculum. A Miracle saith Mr. Perkins, is that which is above, or against nature simply; a wonder is that which proceeds not from the ordinary course of nature. Delrio will have a Miracle to be Praeter, or supra naturae creatae vires, both seem to agree in this that he had need be an admirable or profound Philosopher, that can distinguish between a Wonder and a Miracle; it would pose Aristotle himself, to tell us every thing that can be done by the power of Nature, and what things cannot, for there be daily many things found out, and daily more may be which our forefathers never knew to be possible in Nature. Those that were converted by the Miracles of our Saviour, never stayed to inquire of their Philosophers what the power of Nature was, it was sufficient to them when they saw things done, the like whereof they had neither seen, nor heard of to believe them to be Miracles.  
6. It is commonly believed, and affirmed by Mr. Perkins, that the cause which moves the devil to bargain with a Witch, is a desire to obtain thereby the soul and Body of the Witch. But I cannot see how this can agree with another Doctrine of his, where he saith, the Precepts of witchcraft are not delivered indifferently to every Man, but to his own Subjects the wicked; and not to them all, but to special and tried ones, whom he most betrusteth with his secrets, as being the fittest to serve his turn, both in respect of their willingness to learn and practice; as also for their ability to become Instruments of the mischief he intendeth to others. All this argues the end of the devil's rules of witchcraft is not to gain Novices for new Subjects, but to make use of old ones to serve his turn.  
7. The last clause of Mr. Perkins definition is, that witchcraft doth work wonders so far as God shall permit. I should here desire to have known whether Mr. Perkins had thought that God doth permit farther power to the devil upon his contracting with the Witch, than he had before the Contract; for if the devil had the same permission before the Contract, than he doth no more mischief upon the Contract, than he would have gladly done before, 
Cap. 7.  seeing as Mr. Perkins saith, The devil's malice towards all Men is of so high a degree, that he cannot endure they should enjoy the World, or the benefits of this life (if it were possible) so much as one hour. But yet afterwards I find Master Perkins is more favourable to the devil, where he writes, that if the devil were not stirred up, and provoked by the Witch he would never do so much hu●t as he doth.   

Of the Discerning, and Discovery of a Witch.  

Cap. 7. Sect. 2.  A Magistrate, saith Mr. Perkins, may not take upon him to examine whom, and how he willeth of any Crime, nor to proceed upon slight causes, or to show his Authority, or upon sinister respects, or to revenge his malice, or to bring parties into danger, and suspicion, but he must proceed upon special presumptions.  

Cap. 7. Sect. 2.  He calls those presumptions which do at least probably, and conjecturally note one to be a Witch, and are certain signs whereby the Witch may be discovered. I cannot but wonder that Mr. Perkins should say that presumptions do at least probably, and conjecturally note, and are certain signs to discover a Witch; when he confesseth that though presumptions give occasion to examine, yet they are no sufficient causes of conviction: and though presumptions be never so strong, yet they are not proofs sufficient for conviction, but only for examination. Therefore no credit is to be given to those presumptions he reckons up. 1. For common fame, it falls out many times, saith he, That the innocent may be suspected, and some of the better sort notoriously defamed. 2. The testimony of a fellow Witch, he confesseth, doth not probably note one to be a Witch. The like may be said of his third and fourth presumption, if after cursing, or quarrelling, or threatening there follow present mischief; And the fifth presumption is more frivolous, which is, if the party be the Son, or Daughter, or Servant, or Friend near Neighbour, or old Companion of a witch. The sixt presumption Mr. Perkins dares not, or is loath to own, but saith, some add, if the party Suspected have the devil's mark, and yet he resolves if such a mark be descried, whereof no evident reason in nature can be given, the Magistrate may cause such to be examined, or take the matter into his own hands, that the truth may appear, but he doth not teach how the truth may be made to appear. The last presumption he names is, if the party examined be unconstant, or contrary to himself, here he confesseth, a good Man may be fearful in a good cause, sometimes by Nature, sometimes in regard of the presence of the Judge, or the greatness of the Audience, some may be suddenly taken, and others want that liberty of speech, which other Men have.  
Touching Examination Mr. Perkins names two kinds of proceedings, either by simple Question, or by Torture. Torture, when besides the enquiry by words, the Magistrate useth the Rack, or some other violent means to urge Confession; this he saith, may be lawfully used, howbeit not in every case, but only upon strong, and great presumptions, and when the party is obstinate. Here it may be noted that it is not lawful for any person, but the Judge only to allow Torture, suspicious Neighbours may not of their own heads use either Threats, Terrors, or Tortures; I know not any one of those presumptions before cited to be sufficient to warrant a Magistrate to use Torture, or whether when the party constantly denies the Fact, it must be counted obstinacy. In case of Treason sometimes, when the main Fact hath been either confessed, or by some infallible proofs manifested, the Magistrate for a farther discovery of some circumstance of the Time, the Place, and the Persons, or the like, have made use of the Rack, and yet that kind of torture hath not been of ancient usage in this kingdom, for if my memory fail not, I have read that the Rack hath been called the Duke of Exeter's Daughter, and was first used about Hen. 6. days.  
From presumptions, Mr. Perkins proceeds to proofs of a Witch, and here he hath a neat distinction of proofs, less sufficient, or more sufficient; by less sufficient he meaneth insufficient, but gives them this mild and strange phrase of less sufficient, that it may not displease such friends (as I conceive) allow those less sufficient proofs for sufficient, though he reckons them for no better than witchcraft. Those unsufficient sufficient proofs are weaker, and worse than his presumptions which he confesseth are no proofs at all; yet we must reckon them up, his first less sufficient proof is, The ancient trial by taking red hot Irons, or putting the hand in hot scalding water, this he saith, hath been condemned for diabolical, and wicked, as in truth it is, for an innocent Man may thereby be condemned, and a rank Witch scape unpunished. A second insufficient proof is, Scratching of the suspected party, and the present recovery thereupon. A third is the burning the thing bewitched, as a Hog, an Ox, or other Creature, it is imagined a forcible means to cause the Witch to discover herself. A fourth is the burning the Thatch of the suspected parties House. The fift less sufficient proof is the binding of the party hand and foot, and casting cross ways into the water, if she sinks she is counted innocent, if she float on the water, and sink not, she is taken for a Witch, convicted, and punished. The Germans used this trial by cold water, and it was imagined that the devil being most light, as participating more of air then of Water, would hold them up above the Water, either by putting himself under the Witch, and lifting her up, as it were with his back, or by uniting himself, and possessing her whole body.  
All these less sufficient proofs, saith Mr. Perkins, are so far from being sufficient, that some of them, if not all are after a sort practices of witchcraft, having no power by God's Ordinance. Hereby he condemns point blank King James' judgement as savouring of witchcraft in allowing of the trial of a Witch by swimming as a principal proof. And, as I take it, he condemns himself also, except he can find any ordinance of God, that the having of an incurable, and insensible mark, or sore, shall be a presumption, or certain sign of a Witch.  
A sixt less sufficient proof is the Testimony of a wizard, Witch, or cunning Man, who is gone or sent unto, and informs that he can show in a glass the Face of the Witch. This accusation of a Witch by an other Witch, Mr. Perkins denies to be sufficient, and he puts this case. If the devil appear to a Grand Jury, in the likeness of some known Man, and offer to take his Oath that the person in question is a Witch should the Enquest receive his Oath, or accusation to condemn the party? He answers, Surely No; and yet that is as much as the Testimony of an other Witch, who only by the help of the devil revealeth the Witch: if this should be taken for a sufficient proof, the devil would not leave one good Man alive in the World.  
This discrediting of the Testimony of a Witch takes away the other (for he hath but two) of King James main proofs, for the discovery of a Witch, for he saith, Who but Witches can be provers, and so witnesses of the doings of Witches? and to the same purpose Mr. Perkins himself confesseth, that the Precepts of witchcraft are not delivered, but to the devils own subjects, the wicked.  
A seventh less sufficient proof is, when a Man in open Court affirms, such a one fell out with me, and cursed me, threatening I should smart for it in my person or goods, upon these threats such evils and Losses presently befell me; This is no sure ground for conviction, saith Mr. Perkins, for it pleaseth God many times to lay his Hands upon men's persons and goods, without the procurement of Witches; and yet saith Mr. Perkins, Experience shows that ignorant people will make strong proofs of such presumptions, whereupon sometimes Jurors do give their Verdict against parties innocent.  
The last less sufficient proof is, if a Man being sick, upon suspicion, will take it on his Death, that such a one hath bewitched him, it is of no moment, saith Mr. Perkins, it is but the suspicion of one Man for himself, and is of no more force than an other man's word against him.  
All these proofs, saith Mr. Perkins, which Men in place have ordinarily used, be either false, or insufficient signs.  
At the last Mr. Perkins comes to his more sufficient proofs, which in all are but two. The confession of the Witch, or the proof of two witnesses. Against the Confession of a Witch Mr. Perkins confesseth, 
Cap. 7. Sect. 2.  it is objected that one may confess against himself an untruth being urged by force, or threatening, or by desire upon some grief to be out of the World or at least being in trouble, and persuaded it is the best course to save their lives, and obtain their liberty, they may upon simplicity be induced to confess that they never did, even against themselves. The truth of this allegation Mr. Perkins doth not deny, but grants it, in that his Answer is, That he doth not say a bare Confession is sufficient, but a Confession after due Examination taken upon pregnant presumptions. But if a bare Confession be not a sufficient proof, a pregnant presumption can never make it such; or if it could, than it would not be a sufficient proof. For the farther weakening of the Confession of a suspected Witch, we may remember what Mr. Perkins hath formerly answered, when it was alleged that upon a melancholy humour many confess of themselves things false, 
Cap 7. Sect. 13  and impossible; that they are carried through the air in a moment, that they pass through Keyholes, and cleffs of doors, that they be sometimes turned into Cats, Hares, and other Creatures, and such like, all which are mere Fables and things impossible. Here Master Perkins answers, that when Witches begin to make a league, they are sober and sound in understanding, but after they be once in the league, their reason, and understanding may be depraved, memory weakened and all the powers of their soul blemished, they are deluded and so intoxicated that they will run into a thousand of fantastical imaginations, holding themselves to be transformed into the shapes of other Creatures, to be transported in the air, to do many strange things, which in truth they do not.  
Now Mr. Perkins will confess that the Examination, and Confession of a suspected Witch is always after such time as her Covenant is made; when she is by his Confession deluded, and not fit to give testimony against herself.  
His second more sufficient proof (He saith, if the party will not confess, as commonly it falleth out) is two witnesses avouching upon their own knowledge, either that the party accused hath made league with the devil, or hath done some known practices of Witch craft, or hath invocated the devil, or desired his help. But if every Man that hath invocated the devil, or desired his help must have formerly made a league with him, then whole Nations are every Man of them witches, which I think none will say.  
As for the League, and proof of witchcraft, Mr. Perkins confesseth, Some may say, if these be the only strong proofs for the conviction of a Witch, it will be then impossible to put any one to Death; because the League with Satan is closely made, and the practices of witchcraft are also very secret, and hardly can a Man be brought, which upon his own knowledge can aver such things. To this Mr. Perkins answer is a confession, that howsoever the ground and practise be secret, and be to many unknown, yet there is a way to come to the knowledge thereof— Satan endeavoreth the discovery, and useth all means to disclose Witches. This means he speaks of should be in the power of the Judge, or else it is no help for the Discovery of a Witch, but only when the devil pleaseth. I do not find he proves that it is usual with Satan to endeavour any such Discovery; neither do I see how it is practicable by the devil, for either he must do it by his own relation, or report, which as it cannot be proved he ever did, so it is vain, and to no purpose if he do it, for Mr. Perkins hath discredited the testimony of the devil as invalid, and of no force for conviction, or else the devil must discover it by some second means; and if there had been any such second means usual, Mr. Perkins would have taught us what they are, and not have left us only to his two more sufficient proofs, which he confesseth are not infallible.  

Lib. 2. Cap. 2.  King James tells us, that the devils first discovering of himself for the gaining of a Witch, is either upon their walking solitarily in the Fields, or else lying pausing in their Bed, but always without the company of any other; and at the making of Circles and Conjurations, none of that craft will permit any others to behold; when the devil and his subjects are thus close, and secret in their Actions, it cannot be imagined that he will use all means to discover his most special and trustiest subjects, and though Mr. Perkins tells us, 
Cap. 7. Sect. 2.  that by virtue of the precontract, the devil is cocksure of his instruments; yet within a few lines he changeth his note, and saith, though he have good hope of them, yet he is not certain of their continuance, because some by the Mercy of God have been reclaimed, and freed from his Covenant. Besides he confesseth, the devil suffereth some to live long undisclosed, that they may Exercise the greater measure of his Malice in the World. It remains that if the two true proofs of Mr. Perkins, which are the Witches Confession, or sufficient witnesses fail, we have not warrant, as he saith, in the word to put such an one to Death.  
I conclude this Point in the words of Mr. Perkins; I advise all Jurors that as they be diligent in the zeal of God's Glory, so they would be careful what they do, and not condemn any party suspected upon bare presumptions, without sound and sufficient proofs, that they be not guilty through their own rashness of shedding innocent blood.   

Of the Hebrew Witch.  
IN Deut. 18. The Witch is named with divers other sorts of such as used the like unlawful Arts, as the Diviner, the Observer of times, an enchanter, a Charmer, a Consulter with a familiar Spirit, a wizard, or a Necromancer. The Text addeth, all that do these things are an abomination to the Lord, and because of these abominations, the Lord thy God doth drive them [the Nations] out from before thee. If we desire to know what those abominations of the Nations were, we are told in general in the 14. Verse of the same Chapter. These Nations hearkened unto observers of times and unto Diviners: There is no other crime in this Chapter laid to the charge of all, or any of these practisers of such unlawful Arts, but of lying Prophecies; and therefore the Text addeth, the Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee of thy Brethren, like unto me, unto him shall ye hearken, and not to the Diviners, wizards, Charmers, &c.  
Setting aside the case of Job (wherein God gave a special and extraordinary Commission) I do not find in Scripture that the devil, or Witch, or any other had power ordinarily permitted them, either to kill or hurt any Man, or to meddle with the Goods of any: for though for the trial of the hearts of men, God doth permit the devil ordinarily to tempt them; yet he hath no Commission to destroy the Lives or Goods of Men, it is little less than blasphemy to say any such thing of the admirable Providence of God, whereby he preserves all his Creatures.  
It was crime sufficient for all those practicers of unlawful Arts to delude the people, with false and lying Prophecies, thereby to make them forget to depend upon God, and to have their souls turn after such as have Familiar Spirits, and after wizards, to go a-whoring after them, as the Lord saith, Levit. 20. 6. This spiritual whoredom is flat Idolatry in the common phrase of the Old Testament; and those that be entisers to it, thereby endeavour to destroy the souls of the People, and are by many degrees more worthy of death, than those that only destroy the Bodies or Goods of Men.  
If there were a Law that every one should be put to Death, or punished that should advisedly endeavour to persuade Men that they are skilful in those forbidden Arts, or in foretelling of things to come, or that they have contracted with the devil, and can thereby Murder or destroy men's Goods, I should never deny such a Law to be most consonant, and agreeing with the Law of Moses.  
But because I may be thought by some a favourer of these forbidden Arts, through want of understanding the Scripture, about the quality of them; I have made choice of a Man who is no friend to Witches, and whose learning in this point will not be denied. In his own words I shall set down, what either out of the Hebrew Names of those prohibited Arts, or out of the exposition of the Jewish Doctors can be gathered, for the understanding of them.  
A Diviner in Hebrew, 
Ainsworth upon Deut. 18.  a Foreseer, or Presager, a Foreteller of things to come, as doth a Prophet— the Hebrews take a Diviner to be one that doth things whereby he may foretell things to come, and say, such a thing shall be, or not be, or say, It is good to do Such a thing— the means of Divining; some doing it with Sand, some with Stones, some by lying down on the Ground, some with Iron, some with a staff— he that asked of a Diviner, is chastised with stripes.  
2. An observer of times, or Soothsayer, an Observer of the Clouds, a Planetary, or an observer of the flying of Foules, an Augur. As the Diviners were carried much by inward, and spiritual Motions, so these by outward Observations in the Creatures. The Hebrews say, they were such as did set times for the doing of things, saying, Such a day is good, and such a day is nought.  
3. An Observer of Fortunes, one that curiously searcheth signs of good or evil luck, which are learned by Experience: the Hebrew is to find out by Experience; Whereupon the word here used is one that too curiously observeth, and abuseth things that do fall out as lucky, or unlucky. The Hebrews describe it thus, as if one should say, because the morsel of Bread is fallen out of my mouth, or my staff out of my hand, I will not go to such a place: because a Fox passed by on my right hand, I will not go out of my House this day. Our new translation renders this word an enchanter.  
4. A Witch a Sorcerer, such as do bewitch the senses, or minds of Men, by changing the forms of things to another hew. The Hebrew word for a Witch properly signifies a juggler, and is derived from a word which signifies changing or turning. and Moses teacheth Exod. 7. that Witches wrought by Enchantments, that is, by secret Sleights jugglings, Close conveyance, or of Glistering like the flame of Fire, or a Sword wherewith men's Eyes were dazzled.  
5. A Charmer, or one that conjureth Conjurations, the Hebrew signifies conjoining or consociating— the Charmer is said to be he, that speaketh words of a strange Language, and without sense; that if one say, so or so unto a Serpent, it cannot hurt him; he that whispereth over a wound, or that readeth over an Infant, that it may not be frighted, or layeth the Bible upon a Child that it may sleep.  
6. A wizard, or cunning Man in Hebrew named of his knowledge, or cunning— the Hebrews describe him thus, that he put in his mouth a bone of a Bird, and burned incense, and did other things until he fell down with shame, and spoke with his mouth things that were to come to pass.  
7. A Necromancer, one that seeketh unto the Dead: of him they say, he made himself hungry, and went and lodged among the Graves, that the dead might come unto him in a dream, and make known unto him that which he asked of him, and others there were that clad themselves with clothes for that purpose, and spoke certain words, and burned Incense, and slept by themselves, that such a dead person might come and talk with them in a Dream.  
8. Lastly, The Consulter with Familiar Spirits, in Hebrew a Consulter with Ob, applied here to magicians, who possessed with an evil Spirit, spoke with a hollow voice, as out of a Bottle.— The Hebrews explain it thus, that he which had a Familiar spirit stood and burned Incense, and held a rod of myrtle-tree in his hand, and waved it, and spoke certain words in secret, until he that inquired did hear one speak unto him, and answer him touching that he inquired with words from under the Earth, with a very low voice, &c. Likewise one took a dead man's Skull, and burnt Incense thereto, and enchanted thereby till he heard a very low voice, &c. This Text in our English translation being expounded a Familiar Spirit, and seconded by the History of the Woman of Endor, may seem a strong evidence that the devil covenanted with Witches; But if all be granted that can be desired, that this Familiar Spirit signifies a devil, yet it comes not home to prove the main point, for it is no proof that the Familiar Spirit entered upon Covenant, or had or could give power to others to kill the persons, or destroy the Goods of others, Kings James confesseth, the devil can make some to be possessed, and so become very Demoniaques, and that she who had the spirit of Python in Acts 16. Whereby she conquested such gain to her Master that spirit was not of her own raising, or commanding as she pleased to appoint but spoke by her Tongue as well privately as publicly. we do not find the pythoness condemned or reproved, but the unclean Spirit commanded in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. The Child which was too young to make a Covenant with the devil was possessed with a dumb and deaf Spirit, and the devil charged to come out, and enter no more into him Mark 9 A Daughter of Abraham (that is, of the Faith of Abraham) was troubled with a spirit of infirmity 18 years, and bowed together, that she could not lift herself up. Luke 13. 10. 16.  
It is observable that in Deut. 18. where all the unlawful Arts are reckoned up, and most fully prohibited, the crime of them is charged upon the practisers of those Arts, but the crime of having a Familiar Spirit is not there condemned, but the Consulter of a Familiar Spirit, so in Levit. 19 31. the prohibition is, Regard not them that have Familiar Spirits, and so in Levit. 20. 6. The soul that turneth after such as have Familiar Spirits, so that it was not the having, but the consulting was condemned.  
If we draw nearer to the words of the Text, it will be found that these words a Consulter with a Familiar Spirit are no other than a Consulter with Ob. Where the question will be what Ob signifieth. Expositors agree that originally Ob signifieth a Bottle, and they say is applied here to one possessed with an evil Spirit, and speaketh with a hollow voice as out of a Bottle; but for this I find no proof, they bring out of Scripture that saith, or expoundeth that Ob signifieth one possessed with a Familiar Spirit in the Belly; the only proof is that the Greek Interpreters of the Bible Translate it Engastromuthi, which is, speaking in the Belly, and the word anciently, and long before the time of the Septuagint Translators was properly used for one that had the cunning or slight to shut his mouth, and seem to speak with his Belly, which that it can be done without the help of a Familiar Spirit, experience of this Age showeth in an Irishman; We do not find it said that the Woman of Endo did foretell any thing to Saul, by the hollow voice of a Familiar Spirit in her Belly; neither did Saul require, nor the Woman promise so to answer him, but he required, bring me him up who I shall name unto thee, and she undertook to do it; which argues a desire in Saul to consult with the dead, which is called Necromancy, or consulting with the dead.  
But it hath been said, she raised the devil in Samuel's likeness, yet there is no such thing said in the Text: when the Woman went about her work, the first thing noted is, that when she saw Samuel, she cried out with a loud voice: an Argument she was frighted with seeing something she did not expect to see; it is not said that when she knew Saul, but when she saw Samuel, She cried out with a loud voice: when she knew Saul she had no reason to be afraid, but rather comforted, for that she had his Oath for her security.  
It may well be that if either she had a Familiar Spirit, or the Art of hollow-speaking, her intention was to deceive Saul and by her secret voice to have made him believe that Samuel in another room had answered him; for it appears that Saul was not in the place where she made a show of raising Samuel, for when she cried out with a loud voice, Saul comforted her, and bid her not be afraid, and asked her what she saw? and what form is he of? which questions need not have been if Saul had been in the Chamber with the Witch. King James confesseth that Saul was in another chalmer at the conjuration, and it is likely the Woman had told Saul she had seen some fearful sight, which made him ask her what she saw? and her answer was, She saw God's ascending out of the Earth, and it may be understood that Angels waited upon Samuel, who was raised by God, and not any Puppets, or devils that she conjured up: otherwise the words may be translated as Deodat in the margin of his Italian Bible hath it, She saw a Man of Majesty, or Divine Authority ascend, un' huomo di Majesta è d' Authorita Divina, which well answers the question of what form is he of? which is in the singular, not in the plural number.  
We find it said in Esay 29. 4. thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust, and thy voice shall be as one that hath a Familiar Spirit out of the ground and thy speech shall whisper out of the Earth; which argues the voice of Ob was out of the Earth, rather than out of the Belly, and so the Hebrew Exposition which I cited before affirms; some learned have been of Opinion that a natural reason may be given why in some places certain exhalations out of the earth may give to some a prophetical spirit. Add hereunto that some of the Heathen Oracles were said to speak out of the Earth: and among those five sorts of Necromancy, mentioned by Doctor Reynolds in his 76 Lecture of his censure of the Apocryphals, not any of them is said to have any Spirit in their Belly. The Ronanists who are all great affirmers of the power of Witches agree, that the soul of Samuel was sent by God to the Woman of Endor: to this not only Delrio, but Bellarmin before him agrees. That true Samuel did appear as sent by God, as he sent Elias to Ochosias' King of Israel. who being sick sent to consult with Belzebub the God of Echron, may appear, for that Samuel is so true, and certain in his prediction to Saul, which no Witch, no devil could ever have told; for though the wisdom, and Experience of the devil do enable him to conjecture probably of many events, yet positively to say, to morrow thou and thy sons shall die, is more than naturally the devil could know.  
Mr. Perkins confesseth the devil could not foretell the exact time of Saul's death; and therefore he answers that God revealed to the devil as his instrument Saul's overthrow, by which means, and no other the devil was enabled to foretell the death of Saul. Here Mr. Perkins proves not, that Satan was appointed by God to work Saul's overthrow, or that it was made known to him, when it should be done.  
As the rest of the Speech of Samuel is true, so these words of his, Why hast thou disquieted me to bring me up? may be also true, which cannot be if it be spoken by the devil; or why should the Devil tell truths in all other things else, and lie only in this, I know no reason. Doctor Reynolds presseth these words against the appearing of Samuel thus, If Samuel I had said to them he had lied, but Samuel could not lie, for Samuel could not be disquieted, nor raised by Saul. It is true God only raised Samuel effectually, but occasionally Saul might raise him. But saith Doctor Reynolds though Saul was the occasion, yet Samuel could not truly say that Saul had disquieted him, for blessed are they that die in the Lord saith the spirit, because they rest from their labours; and Samuel was no more to be disquieted (if he were sent by God) than Moses and Elias were when they appeared to show the Glory of Christ. Mat. 17. Answer, it did not displease Samuel to be employed in the Office of an angel, but he obeyed God gladly; yet since the occasion of his appearing displeased God, it might for that cause displease also Samuel. Besides we need not understand the disquieting of Samuel's mind, but of his body by not suffering it to rest in peace after death, according to the common, and usual condition of mankind, this sense the original will well bear. Again, it cannot be believed that the devil would ever have preached so Divine and excellent a Sermon to Saul, which was able to have converted, and brought him to Repentance, this was not the way for the devil to bring either Saul, or the Woman to renounce God. Lastly, the Text doth not say that the Woman raised Samuel, yet it calls him Samuel, and saith that Saul perceived, or understood that it was Samuel.  
Mr. Perkins and many others esteem Balam to have been a Witch, or Conjurer, but I find no such thing in the Text; when he was required to curse the people of Israel, his answer was, I will bring you word as the Lord shall speak unto me. Numb 22. 8. and God came unto Balaam in v. 9 and in v. 13. Balaam saith, the Lord refuseth to give me leave, and when Balak sent a second time, his answer was, if Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold I cannot go beyond the Word of the Lord my God to do less or more, in v. the 20. God cometh to Balaam, and said, if the Men come to call thee, go, but yet the words which I shall say unto thee, that shalt thou do. And when Balaam came before Balak he said, v. 38. Lo I am come unto thee, have I now any power at all to say any thing? the Word which God putteth into my mouth, that shall I speak: and in the 23 Chap. v. 18. Balaam saith, how shall I curse whom God hath not cursed? and in v. 12. he saith, must I not take heed to speak that which the Lord hath put into my Mouth? These places laid together prove Balaam to have been a true Prophet of the Lord, and he prophesied nothing contrary to the Lord's command, therefore St. Peter calls him a Prophet.  
Nevertheless it is true that Balaam sinned notoriously, though not by being a Witch or Conjurer, or a false Prophet, his faults were, that when God had told him he should not go to Balak, yet in his covetous heart he desired to go, being tempted with the rewards of Divination, and promise of promotion; so that upon a second Message from Balak he stayed the Messengers to see if God would suffer him to go, wherefore the Lord in his anger sent Balam. Also when God had told Balam that he would bless Israel, yet Balam did strive to tempt God, and by several Altars and Sacrifices to change the mind of God. Again when Balam saw God immutable in blessing Israel, he taught Balak to lay a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit Fornication. Rev. 2. 4. Whereas it is said that Balaam went not up as other times to seek for Enchantments, Num. 24 2. the original is to meet Divinations, that is, he did not go seek the Lord by Sacrifices, as he did, Numb. 23. 3. 15.  
An exact difference between all those Arts prohibited in Deut. no Man I think can give, that in some they did agree, and in others differed, seems probable. That they were all lying and false Prophets, though in several ways, I think none can deny; That they differed in their degrees of punishments is possible, there are but three sorts that can be proved were to be put to death, viz. the Witch, the Familiar Spirit, the wizard. As for the Witch there hath been some doubt made of it. The Hebrew Doctors that were skilled in the laws of Moses, observe that wheresoever one was to die by their Law, the Law always did run in an affirmative precept; as, the the Man shall be stoned, shall die, shall be put to death, or the like; but in this Text, and nowhere else in Scripture the sentence is only a Prohibition negative, Thou shalt not suffer a Witch to live, and not Thou shalt put her to death, or stone her or the like. Hence some have been of Opinion that not to suffer a Witch to live, was meant not to relieve or maintain her by running after her, and rewarding her. The Hebrews seem to have two sorts of Witches, some that did hurt, others that did hold the Eyes, that is, by juggling and sleights deceived men's senses. The first they say, was to be stoned, the other which according to the proper notation of the word, was the true Witch, was only to be beaten.  
The Septuagent have translated a Witch, an Apothecary, a Druggister, one that compounds poisons, and so the Latin word for a Witch is venefica, a maker of poisons: if any such there ever were, or be that by the help of t●e devil do poison, such a one is to be put to death, though there be no Covenant with the devil, because she is an Actor, and principal herself, not by any wonder wrought by the devil, but by the natural, or occult property of the poison.  
For the time of Christ, saith Mr. Perkins, though there be no particular mention made of any such Witch, yet thence it followeth not that there were none, for all things that then happened are not Recorded, and I would fain know of the chief Patrons of them, whether those persons possessed with the devil, and troubled with strange Diseases, whom Christ healed, were not bewitched with some such people as our Witches are? if they say no, let them if they can prove the contrary.  
Here it may be thought that Mr. Perkins puts his Adversaries to a great pinch; but it doth not prove so, for the Question being only, whether those that were possessed in our saviour's Time were bewitched. The Opposers of Mr. Perkins, say they, were not bewitched, but if he or any other say they were, the proof will rest wholly on him, or them to make good their Affirmative; it cannot in reason be expected that his Adversaries should prove the Negative, it is against the Rules of Disputation to require it.   
FINIS.