Deposition of Mercy Lewis v. George Burroughs, and Statement of Thomas Putnam & Edward Putnam v. George Burroughs
Back to PEM: Essex County Court Archives, Vol. 2 | Back to Archive List

Recto

Facsimile
17thc.us

Verso

Facsimile
17thc.us

Source Citation Essex County Court Archives, vol. 2, no. 25, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, Judicial Archives, on deposit James Duncan Phillips Library, Peabody Essex Museum, Salem, MA.
Records of the Salem Witch-Hunt (2009) No. 124: Deposition of Mercy Lewis v. George Burroughs, and Statement of Thomas Putnam & Edward Putnam v. George Burroughs
    No symbol after the date indicates that the assigned date is certain. This is typically based on the inclusion of the date in the text of the document

    indicates that although there is no date on the document itself, internal references or other evidence make the dating probable

    indicates that there is no original date present in the record itself, and there is a lack of sufficient circumstantial evidence, so the date given is the best approximation
    [?] after the date indicates that a date cannot be established with any level of confidence, and a speculative date or month has been assigned

    See pp. 98-99 of Records of the Salem Witch-Hunt for more information about how dates were assigned.
  • May 9, 1692
  • : Deposition
    No symbol after the date indicates that the assigned date is certain. This is typically based on the inclusion of the date in the text of the document

    indicates that although there is no date on the document itself, internal references or other evidence make the dating probable

    indicates that there is no original date present in the record itself, and there is a lack of sufficient circumstantial evidence, so the date given is the best approximation
    [?] after the date indicates that a date cannot be established with any level of confidence, and a speculative date or month has been assigned

    See pp. 98-99 of Records of the Salem Witch-Hunt for more information about how dates were assigned.
  • Aug. 3, 1692
  • : Sworn Before the Grand Jury
    of George Burroughs
    No symbol after the date indicates that the assigned date is certain. This is typically based on the inclusion of the date in the text of the document

    indicates that although there is no date on the document itself, internal references or other evidence make the dating probable

    indicates that there is no original date present in the record itself, and there is a lack of sufficient circumstantial evidence, so the date given is the best approximation
    [?] after the date indicates that a date cannot be established with any level of confidence, and a speculative date or month has been assigned

    See pp. 98-99 of Records of the Salem Witch-Hunt for more information about how dates were assigned.
  • Aug. 5, 1692
  • : Sworn at Trial
    of George Burroughs
The Salem Witchcraft Papers (1977) Vol. 1, pp. 168-169: Mercy Lewis v. George Burroughs
Vol. 1, p. 169: Thomas Putnam and Edward Putnam v. George Burroughs
Woodward's Records of Salem Witchcraft (1864) Vol. 2, pp. 117-118: Mercy Lewis v. Geo. Burroughs
Vol. 2, p. 119: Thomas Putnam Edward Putnam v. Geo. Burroughs
Godbeer's The Salem Witch Hunt (2011) #65 (pp. 133-134): Mercy Lewis against George Burroughs, May 9, 1692
Levin's What Happened in Salem? (1960) pp. 75-76: Mercy Lewis v. Geo Burroughs.
p. 76: Thomas Putnam Edward Putnam v. Geo Burroughs.

| Manuscript Archives | Rare Books | Records of the Salem Witch-Hunt | Salem Witchcraft Papers | Woodward | Godbeer | Levin | Search