Nevertheless, Whittington, after he had been in her society for a short time, began to doubt (as well he might) her supernatural powers. He argued, from a knowledge of the sex's little weaknesses, that if she had had the ability to have assumed any form she had chosen, she doubtlessly would have adopted a more agreeable one than that which she actually appeared under; but then, on the other hand, he contended with himself, that by as much as her real claims upon notice and attention were weak and groundless, by so much must her magic be potent, for that unless the Devil himself had taken possession of the rabble (at her instigation) they never could have seen anything to admire or respect about her.
Still, however, with that good taste so perceptible in all his conduct, Matthew, in order to keep up the dignity of his Enchantress, and to induce spectators to respect her, never ventured to approach her without the most marked actions of humility, never would be covered in her presence, nor treat her with less deference than though she had been a queen.[41]
The more Matthew began to doubt her powers, and to suspect he had been in some sort duped, the more he raved about the excellent qualities of his great Lady—Penthesilea, with all her "magna virtutis documenta" at her back, was not fit to be named in the same day with her. Berenice, Camilla, Zenobia, Valasca the Bohemian, or Amelasunta, queen of the Ostrogoths, had neither fortitude, nor temperance, nor chastity, nor any good qualities to put in competition with hers. And as for the modern ladies, your Laura Bossis or Victoria Accarambonis, or even the renowned Donna Maria Pacheco, Bianca Hedwig, Lady of Duke Henry the beardy of Ligniz, they would have been considered the small fry, the mere white-bait of the sex, compared with Whittington's Enchantress.[42] Matthew daily grew more and more uneasy about his charge: instead of aspiring to dignity, or performing any of those astonishing feats which he expected, she appeared addicted to vulgar habits and coarse pleasures, attracted no respectable admirers, and passed her time in obscure corners, choosing either woods or barns for her lurking-places, to which she was followed only by the very lowest of the rabble.
It was a matter of delicacy with Matthew not to hint that he should be glad to see some proof of her powers, for by the murmurs which he heard, in bettermost life, he apprehended that the Legislature would interfere, in order to put a stop to her imposition.
Matthew now stood in a very awkward situation: he had brought an unwelcome object into England, contrary to the advice of all those about her, and in direct opposition to the feelings of all the respectable part of the community, and had, in fact, drawn himself into the disagreeable certainty of being wrong under all circumstances.
If she really were what he boasted her to be, he was amenable to the laws, which, as Blackstone says, both before and since the Conquest, have been equally severe, ranking the crime of sorcery and of those who consult sorcerers in the same class with heresy, and condemning both to the flames. If she were not, he had foisted a deception upon the mob, which they never would forgive.
This he knew, and therefore felt his full share of agreeable sensations arising from the alternative, which presented itself of being burned alive in one case, and universally laughed at in the other; not but that it must be allowed that Mr. W. possessed amongst other characteristics of fortitude, a surprisingly stoical callousness to ridicule.
His apprehensions about the interference of the Legislature were by no means groundless. It was evidently necessary to open the eyes of the country to the flagrant imposition which was carrying on, and to which poor Whittington most innocently and unintentionally had made himself a party. The brave man, however, began to feel a few fears, which had hitherto been strangers to his great heart: testimonies of his enchantress's charlatanerie were forthcoming from every quarter, of which she was perfectly aware, but advised Matthew to put a good face upon the matter and brave it out, assuring him, that if it came to evidence, she could produce a great many more witnesses of her innocence than her opponents could bring forward of her guilt.
This mode of exculpation has been recorded by a very popular writer of much later days.[43] He relates an anecdote where a murder was clearly proved against a prisoner by the concurrent testimony of seven witnesses: when the culprit was called on for his defence, he complained of want of evidence against him; for, said he, "My Lord and Gentlemen of the Jury, you lay great stress upon the production of seven persons who swear that they saw me commit the crime. If that be all, I will produce you seven times as many who will swear that they did not see me do it." Much on a par with this was the favourable evidence on which this eminent piece of injured innocence relied for exculpation.[44]
The most singular part of the story is, that with all Matthew's well-known intelligence, good sense, prudence, amiability, and virtue, his zeal got the better of his consistency. He and his friends who most warmly espoused the cause of the great impostor, were those who from time immemorial had upheld the democracy of the constitution, had rung the changes upon all the virtuous attributes of low life, "Honest Poverty," and "The Sovereignty of the People;" but, strange to say, in their excessive zeal for their new idol, these equalizing politicians decided unanimously, that all the witnesses who were to prove her misdeeds, were perjured villains and infamous rogues, even before they had said a syllable on the subject, because, forsooth, they were poor and shabbily clothed, as if a line coat were essential to truth and justice, or that a poor man could not speak truth.