1882.] Witchcraft, Insanity, and Crime. 509 
startled, and the public in general began to ask the question, 
“ Who is safe ? ” In short, the witch-massacres came to an 
end much on the same principle as did the “ reign of terror” 
in the first French Revolution. 
A prominent feature in Dr. Beard’s treatment of the 
question of sorcery is the parallel which he attempts to 
draw between the Salem witch-trials and the recent con- 
demnation of Guiteau. Both, he considers, turned upon 
insanity. He admits one important distinction, — i.e., that in 
the Salem inquisitions the insanity was on the part of the 
accusers and witnesses, whilst in the recent transaction at 
Washington it was on the part of the accused. He fails, 
however, to note a distinction which to me seems all- 
important. No one doubts, or could doubt, that President 
Garfield was murdered, — or killed, if the term murder is 
objected to. Nor could any one deny that Guiteau, taken 
as he was “ red-handed,” was the man who fired the fatal 
shot. But in the witch-trials the case was totally different. 
Suppose Ann Putnam, one of the “ afflicted,” really felt un- 
pleasant symptoms, which were described as choking, 
pinching, biting, and generally tormenting, there was no 
proof that these phenomena had any outward objective cause 
at all ! Still less was there any proof that the person 
accused had any more connection with these alleged suffer- 
ings than any other of the thousand million inhabitants of 
the globe. There was indeed testimony, — i.e., assertion, — 
but it was utterly unsupported by faCts. Great weight was 
laid upon the so-called “ speCtre evidence.” If one of the 
accusers swore that she had seen the speCtre of the accused 
in the form of a bird or beast, this was deemed, or dreamed, 
proof that the defendant was a sorcerer ! Hence the paral- 
lelism between, say, Mrs. Nurse and Guiteau is not of the 
closest or most accurate. The latter suffered for a deed 
actually committed, and committed by him only ; the former 
was done to death for an imaginary deed, with which she had 
no demonstrable connection. 
Dr. Beard’s views on the position of the insane before the 
law are peculiar, perhaps in some extent dangerous. He 
holds that “ no more than children, no more than animals, 
can they be legally punished.” Surely anything which is a 
peril to society not only may, but should be, eliminated — 
the idea of-punishment being totally irrelevant. The assas- 
sin is like an infectious cesspool. We do not punish the 
latter, but we incapacitate it by disinfection from doing fur- 
ther harm. Just so with the murderer; public security 
demands his elimination, and whether that elimination take 
