Testimony of John DeRich v. Giles Cory and Statement of Hannah Small & Martha Adams v. Giles Cory
Back to PEM: Essex County Court Archives, Vol. 2 | Back to Archive List
Side 1

Small
virginia.edu

Large
virginia.edu

Source Citation Essex County Court Archives, vol. 2, no. 92, 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. 551: Testimony of John DeRich v. Giles Cory and Statement of Hannah Small & Martha Adams v. Giles Cory
  • Sept. 5, 1692: Testimony
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
The Salem Witchcraft Papers (1977) Vol. 1, p. 245: John DeRich v. Giles Corey
Vol. 1, p. 245: Hannah Small and Martha Adams v. Giles Corey
Levin's What Happened in Salem? (1960)
Woodward's Records of Salem Witchcraft (1864) Vol. 2, pp. 179-180: John Dorich v. Giles Corey
Vol. 2, p. 180: Hannah Small & Martha Adams v. Giles Corey


Home Page | Manuscript Archives | Rare Books | Records of the Salem Witch-Hunt | Salem Witchcraft Papers | Woodward (1864) | Search