[Footnote 547: COTTON MATHER, in his life of Danforth, says: "After his Contraction, according to the old usage of New England, unto the virtuous daughter of Mr. Wilson (whereat Mr. Cotton preached the sermon), he was married unto that gentle-woman, in the year 1651."--MATHER, _Magnalia_, IV, c. 3, § 6, Vol. II, 50. _Cf._ DEXTER, _Congregationalism_, 458 n. 166, who cites also a statement in MATHER'S _Ratio_, 112; likewise WINTHROP, _Hist. of New England_, II, 382 n. 2, whose mistake has already been mentioned. Compare EARLE, _Customs and Fashions_, 68 ff., who gives the "texts" of some of the betrothal sermons.] [Footnote 548: _Conn. Col. Rec._, I, 47, 48.] [Footnote 549: SHIRLEY, "Early Jurisprudence of New Hamp.," _Procds. New Hamp. Hist. Soc._ (1876-84), 308.] [Footnote 550: GOODWIN, _Pilgrim Republic_, 600; _cf._ _Plym. Col. Rec._, XI, 172.] Undoubtedly pre-contract was derived from the English "espousals," which, it has already appeared, were a direct survival of the _beweddung_ of the Anglo-Saxon laws. But in New England the betrothal gained a peculiar legal significance. "The betrothed woman was put, both by law and social custom, one step above the woman who was not betrothed, and one step below the woman who was married. This was so both as respects the civil and the criminal law."[551] In Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Haven the "espoused wife" like the married wife is to suffer death for adultery;[552] while for fornication, on the other hand, the single woman and her partner in guilt are much less severely punished. The betrothed woman "was sentenced to wear the brand of the 'scarlet letter,' precisely as if she were married."[553] [Footnote 551: SHIRLEY, _loc. cit._, 308.] [Footnote 552: WHITMORE, _Col. Laws of Mass._ (1660-72), 55, 128; _Conn. Col. Rec._, I, 77; _New Haven Col. Rec._, II, 577; TRUMBULL, _Blue Laws_, 60, 200.] [Footnote 553: SHIRLEY, _loc. cit._, 308. This is true of Connecticut for the entire provincial period: _Acts and Laws_ (New Haven, 1769), 7, but apparently not of Massachusetts under the second charter. In New Hampshire under the Canfield Code, 1682, the betrothed woman is still treated as married, but whipping is dispensed with: _New Hamp. Prov. Papers_, I, 444, 445. But by the act of 1701 she is punished for fornication as a single woman: _ibid._, III, 224.]