The next extract from the records of the court is of peculiar interest. Under date of August 29, 1751, we find the following:
"Ordered that the sheriff employ a workman to make a ducking stool for the use of the county according to law, and bring in his charge at laying the next county levy."
An act of assembly, passed in 1705, in accordance with the old English law, prescribed ducking as the punishment for women convicted as "common scolds." The ducking stool was no doubt made as ordered, but we have searched in vain for an instance of its use. "according to law." The failure to use it was certainly not because there were no scolding women in the county at that time; for soon after the machine was constructed, or ordered, one Anne Brown went into court and "abused William Wilson, gentleman, one of the justices for this county, by calling him a rogue, and that on his coming off the bench she would give it to him with the devil." Mrs. Brown was taken into custody, but not ducked, as far as we can ascertain. Nor was the failure to use the stool due to timidity or tender heartedness on the part of members of the court. They lashed women as well as men at the public whipping-post, and were brave enough to take Lawyer Jones in hand on one occasion for "swearing an oath." After thorough investigation and mature reflection, we have come to the conclusion that the making of the ducking stool was an "Irish blunder" on the part of our revered ancestors. Having provided a jail, stocks, whipping-post, shackles, etc.—all the means and appliances necessary in a well-ordered community—they ordered a ducking stool without reflecting that there was no water deep enough for its use within reach of the court-house.
Let us now refer again to the Rev. John Craig and his narrative. The territory occupied by his congregation was "about thirty miles in length and nearly twenty in breadth." The people agreed to have two meeting-houses, expecting to have two congregations, as afterwards came to pass. The people of the Augusta, or stone church neighborhood, amongst whom Mr. Craig lived, "were fewer in numbers, and much lower as to their worldly circumstances, but a good-natured, prudent, governable people, and liberally bestowed a part of what God gave them for religious and pious uses; always unanimous among themselves." "I had no trouble with them," says Mr.
