Mediumistic Sarah Good, because she was highly mediumistic, would naturally be a brilliant and attractive object in the field of vision which the inner eyes of other mediumistic ones might be able and attracted to survey. Distance is of little or no account in connection with vision by the inner eye. Persons and objects, scores and hundreds of miles away, are practically near to the inner optics. Spirit-forms are, perhaps, thought-forms, and, like thought, can traverse oceans and continents in the twinkling of an eye. It is not our purpose to multiply pages by largely quoting minute accounts of what transpired at the examinations and trials of those who were suspected of witchcraft; and yet it may be well to present rather fully one sample of the proceedings of the courts. This first case which the civil authorities gave attention to may serve that purpose as well as any other. The arrest of Sarah Good was made February 29, and on the next day, Tuesday, March 1, 1692, her examination was commenced, and was continued, in connection with that of Sarah Osburn and Tituba, through the remainder of that week. On Monday, the 7th, these three were sent to jail in Boston. On the 30th of June Mrs. Good was put upon trial, which resulted in her conviction, and on the 19th of July she, together with others, was executed. We copy first Ezekiel Cheever's account of her examination. Cheever was temporary clerk or scribe employed by the examining magistrates to take minutes of the testimony. "'Sarah Good, what evil spirit have you familiarity with?' _Ans._ 'None.' 'Have you made no contract with the devil?' Good answered, 'No.' 'Why do you hurt these children?' _Ans._ 'I do not hurt them. I scorn it.' 'Who do you employ, then, to do it?' _Ans._ 'I employ nobody.'" This question was doubtless based on belief then held, that one who was in covenant with the devil had, by the terms of the covenant, received power to command the devil and his imps to execute any desired mischief. "'What _creature_ do you employ, then?' _Ans._ 'No creature, but I am falsely accused.'" Her statement that she employed _nobody_, seems not to have covered all classes of possible servants in such business. Therefore she was asked what _creature_ she employed. This question suggests the probable supposition by the magistrate that such dogs, cats, birds, and hairy nondescripts as Tituba saw, might be subservient to the commands of a witch. "'Why did you go away muttering from Mr. Parris's house?' _Ans._ 'I did not mutter; but I thanked him for what he gave my child.' 'Have you made no contract with the devil?' _Ans._ 'No.'" The magistrate then "desired the children, all of them, to look upon her and see if this were the person that had hurt them; and so they all did look upon her, and said that this was one of the persons that did torment them. Presently they were all tormented."