The Case of the Piglet’s Paternity. Jon C. Blue

the governor) wanted unsworn witnesses simply to say “yea, yea, nay, nay.”

      This being said, some features of Fugill’s trial strike a familiar chord to the modern observer. The close scrutiny of the handwriting and ink used in the allegedly altered document is vaguely reminiscent of modern handwriting analysis, although it is striking that no one thought to compare the handwriting in question to known exemplars of Fugill’s handwriting. This is the first thing that a modern handwriting expert would do and wouldn’t have been difficult for the New Haven court, since many of its own records had been written by Fugill himself.

      Beyond the particulars of the handwriting and the oaths, however, some universal truths, known to observers of trials in every age, peek through this little narrative. It’s never a good idea to change your story during a trial, and witnesses who do this (there are many) invariably make a poor impression. Ditto for the witness who begins to “turn and wind and so to evade” the questions, as Fugill did when examined by the governor. Needless to say, it’s not a good idea to keep two sets of books. Keeping three sets of books is surely beyond the pale. Above all, physical evidence prevails over oral testimony. Fugill could hardly deny the physical dimensions of his landholdings. And whatever he said by way of explanation, he could not overcome the physical facts of different handwriting and different ink.

       6

      THE SEXUAL HARASSMENT CASE

      Sexual harassment in the workplace is a focal point of modern employment law and a source of periodic headline news when the perpetrators turn out to be public figures, but there is nothing new under the sun.¹ The travails of Goodwife Fancy (whom we briefly met as a witness in the Case of the Exploding Gun) stand as eloquent testimony to the appalling workplace conditions faced by countless low-status women in every age, including our own. Although her voice was heard, her ultimate fate stands as an indictment of the General Court.

      In April 1646, Governor Theophilus Eaton, “being informed of several lewd passages, ordered William Fancy to appear with his wife at the court to answer for them.” At some point, both spouses were examined outside of court, and their examinations were subsequently read in court.

      Goodwife Fancy (we never learn her first name) told the examiner that, about two years previously, she had been working for Goodwife Robinson. She found herself alone in a cellar with Goodwife Robinson’s husband, Thomas Robinson. Thomas took hold of her, pulled down his breeches, put his hand under her skirt,² and “with strength and force labored to satisfy his lust and to defile her.” When she cried out, he covered her mouth. He finally left when he heard some shipmen calling him.

      Later, when the Fancys were living in the cellar of Robert Seely, a lieutenant in the artillery company, she went out in a cornfield to bring in a barrow of wood. She heard a noise in the cornstalks and, looking about, saw Thomas Robinson. She told him, “Go and be hanged. What do you here?” Robinson, however, “fastened upon her [and] strove to have kissed her.” When she cried out, he left her.

      Another time, Goodwife Robinson sent her out to gather pumpkins. Thomas Robinson made a similar attempt, but she resisted and told him that “these practices of his would not long be hid.”

      Again, when she was attempting to catch a hen, Thomas Robinson “came and put down his breeches [and] strove to stop her mouth.” Goodwife Fancy made a noise, and her husband came out of the cellar. Seeing her husband, Robinson left.

      Later, about a year before the trial, the Fancys lived at the house of Thomas Clark. Goodwife Fancy saw Robinson coming and “fearing his filthy lustful attempts, got and stayed out of the house.” Robinson prayed her to come in, but Goodwife Fancy told him that since “her husband knew of his filthy lewd carriages, he must therefore make peace with him.”

      Several weeks before the trial, Thomas Robinson called on William Fancy and told him that Goodwife Robinson wanted “help in her childbed state.” Fancy, “considering the woman’s need,” obligingly consented to allow his wife to provide the requested assistance. Things went well for a week, but in the second week Robinson “returned to his former filthy course.” Goodwife Fancy went with Robinson to the cowhouse one evening to hold a lantern while he caught a hen. Suddenly, Robinson darkened the lantern and “took hold of her in the dark.” She cried out, “What shall I do?” Robinson “put down his breeches, put his hands under her skirt, and got them up, thrust her to the wall … and endeavored with his body to commit adultery with her.” Goodwife Fancy resisted and told him that if he continued “he would come to the gallows.” Robinson “pished at that, but told her he would never meddle with her more.”

      Needless to say, this wasn’t the end of things. Later, Goodwife Fancy went out to fetch wood for a fire. “Robinson followed her, put down his breeches, and endeavored to satisfy his lust as before.” She cried out and threatened to tell his wife. Robinson desisted and assured her that this was his “last attempt upon her.”

      Goodwife Fancy told her examiner that she had “acquainted her husband with Robinson’s lewd, lustful attempts upon her” (except for the cowhouse incident, which happened at a later time) and “pressed him to complain to the Governor.” Her husband, however, refused, saying that his wife, having been previously convicted of thievery,³ would not be believed.

      Robinson’s harassment of Goodwife Fancy eventually came to light as a result of her larcenous past. Robinson, hearing that a pair of scissors was missing, told some people that he thought he had seen the scissors at Goodwife Fancy’s home and that she was a thief. Goodwife Fancy learned of this allegation through one of her employers, Goodwife Thomas. She responded with a proverb: “Save one from the gallows and he will hang you or cut your throat if he can.” When Goodwife Thomas inquired what this meant, Goodwife Fancy disclosed her history of abuse.

      Once Goodwife Fancy had spilled the beans and Robinson’s wife found out about it, Robinson became repentant. Weeping passionately, he met Goodwife Fancy at the cutler’s shop and told her, “He would rather that his life and all goods were gone than that his wife should have known of it.”

      Neither Robinson nor Goodwife Fancy wanted the case to go public, but Goodwife Thomas insisted on seeing some “general reformation” in Robinson’s conduct. Robinson met with one Robert Usher that night and said that his previous remarks were “but a word in jest” and that William Fancy’s wife had wronged him. These statements provoked Usher rather than satisfying him, and “it was resolved that counsel should be asked and proceeding ordered accordingly.”

      Robinson was desperate to settle the matter. About two weeks before the trial, he offered the Fancys ten shillings in silver to drop the prosecution. The Fancys apparently declined the offer and testified in court that it had been made.

      John Thomas and his wife testified that Robinson had acknowledged “some miscarriages” to them and “did weakly if at all deny the rest” of Goodwife Fancy’s charges. Robinson also told them that he knew “that a woman’s word would pass before a man’s in this case.”

      Thomas Robinson’s wife told the court that her husband had confessed that “he had spoken some words to try Fancy’s wife, but he could not own all she had charged him with.” Hearing this, the court asked her where her husband was now. She dramatically replied that “yesterday, in the afternoon, he went forth in a sad discontented frame, and as she since heareth, passed over the ferry, but since she hath not heard of him.”

      With this dramatic announcement, the case against Thomas Robinson ended. As far as the New Haven Colony records indicate, he was never seen again.⁴

      Robinson’s disappearance was not, however, the end of the court’s inquiry into sexual matters involving Goodwife Fancy. William Fancy further testified that, about three months previously, one Mark Meggs had come to their house to collect a debt of eight shillings and asked for him. As Goodwife Fancy passed