Saturday, March 14, 2020

Free Essays on Gays

Last November the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled that excluding gay couples from civil marriage violated the state constitution. The court gave the legislature six months- until May- to do something about it. Some legislators mounted efforts to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage, but as of this writing they have failed (and even if passed, a ban would not take effect until at least 2006). With unexpected urgency the country faces the possibility that marriage licenses might soon be issued to homosexual couples. To hear the opposing sides talk, a national culture war is unavoidable. But same-sex marriage neither must nor should be treated as an all-or-nothing national decision. Instead individual states should be left to try gay marriage if and when they choose- no national ban, no national mandate. Not only would a decentralized approach be in keeping with the country's most venerable legal traditions; it would also improve, in three ways, the odds of making same-sex marriage work for gay and straight Americans alike. (atlantic) PRO: Banning same-sex marriage is discriminatory. Marriage is a basic human right and should not be denied to any individual. At various times in U.S. history, other minorities have been prevented from marrying: African-Americans, for example. Interracial marriage was also legally prohibited in various states, until the Supreme Court ruled such bans unconstitutional in 1967. A Hawaii commission created to examine marriage discrimination concluded that banning gay marriage cut same-sex couples off from a host of tangible advantages, including health and retirement benefits; life insurance, income tax, estate tax and wrongful-death benefits, and spousal and dependent support. Marriage promotes stability. Gay men and lesbians in committed relationships want to be able to celebrate their love and fidelity in the same way that heterosexual couples do. Religious conserva... Free Essays on Gays Free Essays on Gays Last November the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled that excluding gay couples from civil marriage violated the state constitution. The court gave the legislature six months- until May- to do something about it. Some legislators mounted efforts to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage, but as of this writing they have failed (and even if passed, a ban would not take effect until at least 2006). With unexpected urgency the country faces the possibility that marriage licenses might soon be issued to homosexual couples. To hear the opposing sides talk, a national culture war is unavoidable. But same-sex marriage neither must nor should be treated as an all-or-nothing national decision. Instead individual states should be left to try gay marriage if and when they choose- no national ban, no national mandate. Not only would a decentralized approach be in keeping with the country's most venerable legal traditions; it would also improve, in three ways, the odds of making same-sex marriage work for gay and straight Americans alike. (atlantic) PRO: Banning same-sex marriage is discriminatory. Marriage is a basic human right and should not be denied to any individual. At various times in U.S. history, other minorities have been prevented from marrying: African-Americans, for example. Interracial marriage was also legally prohibited in various states, until the Supreme Court ruled such bans unconstitutional in 1967. A Hawaii commission created to examine marriage discrimination concluded that banning gay marriage cut same-sex couples off from a host of tangible advantages, including health and retirement benefits; life insurance, income tax, estate tax and wrongful-death benefits, and spousal and dependent support. Marriage promotes stability. Gay men and lesbians in committed relationships want to be able to celebrate their love and fidelity in the same way that heterosexual couples do. Religious conserva...

Wednesday, February 26, 2020

Learning Intention Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Learning Intention - Essay Example I try to anticipate the various events that I must go through such as delivering verbal instructions, using teaching aids or other resources in order to augment the learning process. In a somewhat similar manner, the teacher has to be sensitive to what concepts and content is delivered in the class. Modern classrooms are multiracial, multilingual and posses a number of ethnicities and socio economic backgrounds. The individual identity of each student in class must be preserved by paying careful attention to the delivered content. Additionally the teacher must also keep abreast of student’s learning by monitoring it. It is often cumbersome for me to monitor each individual student in my class so I use groups to assess how well each student in class is doing. In order to pose a more innovative teaching stance, I create various hypotheses relating to student behavior, instructional medium and style and test them out both qualitatively and quantitatively as applicable. This allows me to learn more about students and their styles of learning (Hattie, 2012). Above everything else, being a teacher I show the utmost respect for all members of the school including staff, students and faculty. The teacher has to project a friendly identity that is warm and inviting for students so that they can take learning to a more personal

Monday, February 10, 2020

Benefits of renewable energy in the uae Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Benefits of renewable energy in the uae - Essay Example This is due to lack of adequate water supply. The developing cities such as Masdar city, in the United Arab Emirates, primarily rely on the renewable energy to fuel its growth activities. The architectural skills employed by the construction industry within the city are sophisticated and classy. It is anticipated that the rest of the UAE will adopt a similar or more sophisticated architectural skill in the future in order to improve the quality of the buildings and maximize the benefits of the residents. UAE comprises one of the major oil exporters worldwide. Oil has been the major economic pillar in the UAE due to substantial revenue streams from oil export. For decades, the UAE economy has been supported by oil, which has negative consequences to the environment (contributing to global warming). It is time the UAE government considered the exploitation of alternative sources of energy, preferably, the renewable sources. Abu Dhabi is the richest amongst the seven countries of the UAE. The region owns 7.4 % of the world’s oil resources, 3.2 % of global confirmed natural gas supplies, and more than 90 % of the UAE’s oil and natural gas (Abu-Hijleh& Al-Amir, 2013). Abu Dhabi’s GDP is more than half of the federal’s total, and it is presently planning to use about 175 billion dollars on economic diversification in the next six years. Because of its oil wealth, the region’s long-term economic strategy depends widely on a combination of industrialization and overseas investments in the hydrocarbon sectors and energy-intensive sectors due to the existence of the vast amounts of oil oil wealth. In principle, with Abu Dhabi’s oil reserves anticipated to last until the century’s end, its diversification efforts, have never involved an entire shift away from oil resources (Sgouridis et al., 2013). The UAE can be described as a rentier economy due to its immense fossil-fuel resources, timid national

Thursday, January 30, 2020

National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing Essay Example for Free

National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing Essay The case analyses the dynamics of high performance teams using the example of Jeff Gordon’s racing team, a member of National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing (NASCAR). Jeff Gordon was often described as a racing sensation, winning 40 individual races in a four year period. While Gordon was a star and a brand, few spectators knew that his outstanding performance should have been to a large extent attributed to his team consisting of more than a hundred of committed individuals, Rainbow Warriors pit crew, and supervised by visionary team leader, Ray Evernham. According to expert opinion, there are three key ingredients that provide for success in car racing, namely people, equipment and money. While cars and equipment are made approximately even in performance in order to make racing more competitive and spectacular, it is up to pilot and his crew to gain an advantage over the opponents. Effectiveness of Rainbow Warriors pit crew gave Gordon on average a one-second advantage with each pit stop. Ray Evernham managed to gather and develop such an outstanding crew by applying several important principles of group work management. He fostered group cohesion by a variety of methods and believed that sound preparation, ego less teamwork, and original strategizing are the inherent components of success in car racing. In his view, the emphasis should have been on team performance rather than individual performance. In case of a victory, prize money were distributed among all members of the crew; more importantly, the money earned by Evernham through speaking tours and autograph signings were also shared. In 1999, Ray Evernham resigned to start his own organization. Brian Whitesell took over as the crew leader on an interim basis; despite his academic qualifications, he was unable to lead the crew in the way Ray Evernham was. Robbie Loomis became the permanent crew chief, and during six months of the turbulent transition period Gordon haven’t won a single race. However, Loomis was able to deliver a strategic turnaround and ensure Gordon’s continuous success. Answers to Review Questions As concerns the philosophy behind high performance teams, Ray Evernham’s three principles (preparation, ego less teamwork, and innovations in strategizing) are universally applicable in any organization. Evernham was successful in implementing these principles in practice by encouraging teamwork, recognizing that ‘team IQ’ was greater than IQ of any individual member, and promoting cohesion through such practices as a ‘circle of strength’ when all team members sit in a circle facing each other as a symbol of their collective strength. People, management, and psychology came together under his leadership to ensure superiority over the opponents’ performance. The emphasis on continuous learning made it possible to stay ahead for many seasons in a row. However, Evernham also warned against excessive perfectionism that might have been unproductive. Honest acknowledgement of strength and weaknesses and strive for improvement were sufficient to secure a place on top. This is interrelated to yet another principle used by Evernham, namely keeping the egos in check and not boasting any technical or strategic privileges in front of the opponents. The time when a successful leader is replaced by somebody else is a test of group’s cohesiveness and commitment. The downside of the transition period is reduced efficiency and increased entropy. However, the advantage is associated with the fact that such a situation allows the team to reinvent itself to become even stronger and more cohesive, especially if a transformational leader arrives to manage the team. Summary for Managers There are several important implications for managers that stem from the analysis of this case. First of all, the principles which are applied to boost team performance are more or less universal. Focus on teamwork and organizational learning is crucial. The case study clearly states that high performance teams do not emerge by themselves – they require an effective recruiting strategy and attention to learning every detail of the work process. Attributing success and failure to the entire group rather than individual members has proven to increase the group’s performance and motivation. The second important implication has to do with group cohesiveness. When skills and knowledge of all group members combine in a way that exceeds the sum of knowledge of all individual members, the synergy effect can be observed, i. e. the system as a whole has certain qualities its elements do not have. Therefore, it is of paramount importance to pay attentive to group cohesion so that exceptional results can be achieved with limited human resources available in each organization. The third implication concerns team performance in the times of change. The case clearly demonstrates that both leadership and teamwork are equally important for success. With no strong leadership, Gordon’s team was not able to deliver outstanding results. However, the speed at which it was able to regain its position suggests that there were certain qualities of a team that made it possible to succeed even after a change of leadership style. A cohesive team can function efficiently under any talented leader due to close ties between team members and unique group culture that promotes continuous learning and shared responsibility.

Wednesday, January 22, 2020

The Assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand : Trigger for War :: World War I History

The Assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand : Trigger for War Bosnia and Herzegovina were provinces just south of Austria, which had, until 1878, been governed by the Turks. The Treaty of Berlin, in 1878, settled the disposition of lands lost by the Turks following their disastrous war with Russia. Austria was granted the power to administer the two provinces indefinitely. Many Bosnian-Serbs felt a strong nationalistic desire to have their province joined with that of their Serb brothers across the river in Serbia. Many in Serbia openly shared that desire. On October 6, 1908, Austria annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina directly into the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The reasons were complex. Annexation would remove any hopes Turkey might have for reclaiming the provinces. Full inclusion into the empire would give Bosnians full rights and privileges. It may have been an act of will by the Austrians, just to show that they were still an active, sovereign power. Two days later, many men, some of them ranking Serbian ministers, officials, and generals, held a meeting at City Hall in Belgrade. They founded a semi-secret society, Narodna Odbrana (National Defense), which gave Pan-Slavism a focus and an organization. The purpose of the group was to recruit and train partisans for a possible war between Serbia and Austria. They also undertook anti-Austrian propaganda and organized spies and saboteurs to operate within the empire's provinces. Satellite groups were formed in Slovinia, Bosnia, Herzegovina and Istria. The Bosnian group went under the name Mlada Bosna (Young Bosnia). Narodna Odbrana's work had been so effective that in 1909 a furious Austria pressured the Serbian government to put a stop to their anti-Austrian insurrection. Russia was not ready to stand fully behind Serbia should things come to a showdown, so Belgrade was grudgingly forced to comply. From then on, Narodna Odbrana concentrated on education and propaganda within Serbia, trying to fashion itself as a cultural organization. Many members formed a new, and again secret, organization to continue the terrorist actions. Ten men met on May 9, 1911 to form Ujedinjenje ili Smrt (Union or Death), also known as The Black Hand. By 1914, there were several hundred members, perhaps as many as 2500. Many members were Serbian army officers. The professed goal of the group was the creation of a Greater Serbia, by use of violence, if necessary. The Black Hand trained guerillas and saboteurs and arranged political murders. The Assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand : Trigger for War :: World War I History The Assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand : Trigger for War Bosnia and Herzegovina were provinces just south of Austria, which had, until 1878, been governed by the Turks. The Treaty of Berlin, in 1878, settled the disposition of lands lost by the Turks following their disastrous war with Russia. Austria was granted the power to administer the two provinces indefinitely. Many Bosnian-Serbs felt a strong nationalistic desire to have their province joined with that of their Serb brothers across the river in Serbia. Many in Serbia openly shared that desire. On October 6, 1908, Austria annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina directly into the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The reasons were complex. Annexation would remove any hopes Turkey might have for reclaiming the provinces. Full inclusion into the empire would give Bosnians full rights and privileges. It may have been an act of will by the Austrians, just to show that they were still an active, sovereign power. Two days later, many men, some of them ranking Serbian ministers, officials, and generals, held a meeting at City Hall in Belgrade. They founded a semi-secret society, Narodna Odbrana (National Defense), which gave Pan-Slavism a focus and an organization. The purpose of the group was to recruit and train partisans for a possible war between Serbia and Austria. They also undertook anti-Austrian propaganda and organized spies and saboteurs to operate within the empire's provinces. Satellite groups were formed in Slovinia, Bosnia, Herzegovina and Istria. The Bosnian group went under the name Mlada Bosna (Young Bosnia). Narodna Odbrana's work had been so effective that in 1909 a furious Austria pressured the Serbian government to put a stop to their anti-Austrian insurrection. Russia was not ready to stand fully behind Serbia should things come to a showdown, so Belgrade was grudgingly forced to comply. From then on, Narodna Odbrana concentrated on education and propaganda within Serbia, trying to fashion itself as a cultural organization. Many members formed a new, and again secret, organization to continue the terrorist actions. Ten men met on May 9, 1911 to form Ujedinjenje ili Smrt (Union or Death), also known as The Black Hand. By 1914, there were several hundred members, perhaps as many as 2500. Many members were Serbian army officers. The professed goal of the group was the creation of a Greater Serbia, by use of violence, if necessary. The Black Hand trained guerillas and saboteurs and arranged political murders.

Tuesday, January 14, 2020

Cardiovascular Endurance of the Genders Question Essay

Cardiovascular Endurance of the Genders Question- Does weight and differences of age have to do with different heart rates and recovery times with the step test experiment? Independent Variable Pre- Exercise Heart Rate Dependent Variables 1. Post- Exercise Heart rate 2. Change in heart rate 3. Recovery Time Hypothesis – If a subject being tested is fit then there should not be a big change in heart rate and there should be minimal recovery time to get back to the normal heart rate in which they started. Experiment Protocol- 1. Testing all members of the group and recording the results. 2. Measure pre-exercise pulse rate using a pulse monitor of the first subject 3. Making sure the first subject is in sequence with their steps to the metronome 4. This sequence should be 3 minutes with a rate of about 25 steps a minutes on a six inch step 5. After the exercise the subject has to sit down immediately 6. The pulse monitor needs to be taken out. 7. Then measurements should be taken of the subjects post exercise pulse rate 8. Then the timer was taken out. 9. Next the subjects pulse rate was monitored until it returned to the pre-exercise pulse rate which is the recovery time. 10. Steps 2-5 had to repeated for others within in the group 11. After everything was completed the results were compared with other groups in the class. The measures that were taken to ensure consistency throughout the experiment were to just do everything at relatively the same pace with every subject so there would not be any dramatic changes in data. Conclusion- In conclusion it does not matter whether you are male or female when it comes to cardiovascular fitness. This is because cardiovascular fitness is entirely based on a test that assesses your fitness level based on how quickly your heart rate recovers after exercise. The fitter you are, the uicker your heart rate will return to normal after exercise. I accept my hypothesis because my results from the people in my group as well as the class showed that the fitter you are the quicker your heart rate will return to normal. My conclusion could possibly be different If I only analyzed the data gathered by my lab partners of my table because this would not really allow me to determine if cardiovascular fitness is actually based off gender or fitness due to the high ratio of three women to one man compared to the whole class. Improvements to the experiment- 1. one way to improve this experiment would be to have a chart that shows good, poor, or average Heart rates to have a better idea to make comparisons between gender cardiovascular fitness 2. Another way to improve my experiment would be to be more consistent with my group members in transitioning from the pulse monitor to the timer so we don’t have to start over 3. Another way to improve this experiment would be to run it longer than three minutes and more than once to see if the data is consistent.

Monday, January 6, 2020

Biography of Elizabeth Proctor

Elizabeth Proctor was convicted in the 1692  Salem witch trial. While her husband was executed, she escaped execution because she was pregnant at the time she would have been hanged. Age at time of Salem witch trials:  About 40Dates:  1652 to UnknownAlso known as: Goody Proctor Before the Salem Witch Trials Elizabeth Proctor was born in Lynn, Massachusetts.  Her parents had both emigrated from England and had married in Lynn.  She married John Proctor as his third wife in 1674; he had five (possibly six) children still living with the eldest, Benjamin, about 16 at the marriage. John and Elizabeth Bassett Proctor had six children together; one or two had died as infants or young children before 1692. Elizabeth Proctor managed the tavern owned by her husband and his eldest son, Benjamin Proctor. He had a license to operate the tavern beginning in 1668. Her younger children, Sarah, Samuel and Abigail, ages 3 to 15, probably helped with tasks around the tavern, while William and his older stepbrothers helped John with the farm, a 700-acre estate south of Salem Village. Salem Witch Trials The first time Elizabeth Proctor’s name comes up in the Salem witch accusations is on or after March 6, when Ann Putnam Jr. blamed her for an affliction. When a relative by marriage, Rebecca Nurse, was accused (the warrant was issued March 23), Elizabeth Proctor’s husband John Proctor made a public statement to the effect that if the afflicted girls were to have their way, all would be â€Å"devils and witches.† Rebecca Nurse, a highly respected member of the Salem Village community, was the mother of John Nurse, whose wife’s brother, Thomas Very, was married to John Proctor’s daughter Elizabeth from his second marriage.  Rebecca Nurse’s sisters were Mary Easty and Sarah Cloyce. John Proctor’s speaking out for his relative may have drawn attention to the family.  About this same time, a Proctor family servant, Mary Warren, began to have fits similar to those of the girls who had accused Rebecca Nurse.  She said she had seen the ghost of Giles Corey.  John threatened her with beatings if she had more fits, and ordered her to work harder. He also told her that if she had an accident while in a fit, running into a fire or into the water, he would not help her. On March 26, Mercy Lewis reported that Elizabeth Proctor’s ghost was afflicting her. William Raimant later reported he’d heard the girls at Nathaniel Ingersoll’s house saying that Elizabeth Proctor would be accused.  He said that one of the girls (perhaps Mary Warren) had reported seeing her ghost, but when others said that the Proctors were good people, she said that it had been â€Å"sport.†Ã‚  He didn’t name which of the girls said that. On March 29 and again a few days later, first Mercy Lewis then Abigail Williams accused her of witchcraft. Abigail accused her again and also reported seeing the ghost of John Proctor, Elizabeth’s husband. Mary Warren’s fits had stopped, and she requested a prayer of thanks at the church, bringing her fits to the attention of Samuel Parris, who read her request to the members on Sunday, April 3, and then questioned her after the church service. Accused Capt. Jonathan Walcott and Lt. Nathaniel Ingersoll signed a complaint on April 4 against Sarah Cloyce (Rebecca Nurse’s sister) and Elizabeth Proctor for â€Å"high suspicion of several acts of witchcraft† done on Abigail Williams, John Indian, Mary Walcott, Ann Putnam Jr, and Mercy Lewis. A warrant was issued on April 4 to bring both Sarah Cloyce and Elizabeth Proctor into custody for an examination at the town public meeting house for an examination on April 8, and ordering as well that Elizabeth Hubbard and Mary Warren appear to give evidence.  On April 11 George Herrick of Essex issued a statement that he had brought Sarah Cloyce and Elizabeth Proctor to the court and had warned Elizabeth Hubbard to appear as a witness. No mention is made of Mary Warren in his statement. Examination The examination of Sarah Cloyce and Elizabeth Proctor took place on April 11.  Thomas Danforth, the Deputy Governor, conducted the verbal examination, first interviewing John Indian.  He said that Cloyce had hurt him â€Å"a great many times† including â€Å"yesterday at the meeting.† Abigail Williams testified to seeing a company of about 40 witches at a sacrament at Samuel Parris’ house, including a â€Å"white man† who â€Å"made all the witches to tremble.† Mary Walcott testified that she had not seen Elizabeth Proctor, so she had not been hurt by her. Mary (Mercy) Lewis and Ann Putnam Jr. were asked questions about Goody Proctor but indicated that they were unable to speak. John Indian testified that Elizabeth Proctor had tried to get him to write in a book. Abigail Williams and Ann Putnam Jr. were asked questions but â€Å"neither of them could make any answer, by reason of dumbness or other fits.† When asked for her explanation, El izabeth Proctor replied that â€Å"I take God in heaven to be my witness, that I know nothing of it, no more than the child unborn.†Ã‚  (She was pregnant at the time of her examination.) Ann Putnam Jr. and Abigail Williams then both told the court that Proctor had tried to get her to sign a book (referring to the devil’s book), and then began to have fits in the court. They accused Goody Proctor of causing them and then accused Goodman Proctor (John Proctor, Elizabeth’s husband) of being a wizard and also causing their fits. John Proctor, when asked his response to the accusations, defended his innocence. Mrs. Pope and Mrs. Bibber then also displayed fits and accused John Proctor of causing them. Benjamin Gould testified that Giles and Martha Corey, Sarah Cloyce, Rebecca Nurse and Goody Griggs had appeared in his chamber the previous Thursday. Elizabeth Hubbard, who had been called to testify, had been in a trance state the whole examination. Abigail Williams and Ann Putnam Jr., during the testimony against Elizabeth Proctor, had reached out as if to strike the accused. Abigail’s hand closed into a fist and touched Elizabeth Proctor only lightly, and then Abigail â€Å"cried out, her fingers, her fingers burned† and Ann Putnam Jr. â€Å"took on most grievously, of her head, and sunk down.† Charges Elizabeth Proctor was formally charged on April 11 with â€Å"certain detestable arts called witchcraft and sorceries† which she was said to have â€Å"wickedly and feloniously† used against Mary Walcott and Mercy Lewis, and for â€Å"sundry other acts of witchcraft.† The charges were signed by Mary Walcott, Ann Putnam Jr., and Mercy Lewis.  Ã‚   Out of the examination, charges were placed against John Proctor as well, and the court-ordered John Proctor, Elizabeth Proctor, Sarah Cloyce, Rebecca Nurse, Martha Corey, and Dorcas Good (misidentified as Dorothy) to the Boston jail. Mary Warren’s Part Notable by her absence was Mary Warren, the servant who had first brought attention to the Proctor household, who the sheriff had been ordered to have appeared, but who does not seem to have been involved in the formal charges against the Proctors to this point, nor to have been present during the examination.  Her answers to Samuel Parris after her initial note to church and her subsequent absence from the proceedings against the Proctors was taken by some to be a statement that the girls had been lying about their fits. She apparently admitted that she had been lying about the accusations. The others began accusing Mary Warren of witchcraft herself, and she was formally accused in court on April 18.  On April 19, she recanted her statement that her previous accusations had been lies. After this point, she began to formally accuse the Proctors and others of witchcraft.  She testified against the Proctors in their June trial. Testimony for the Proctors In April of 1692, 31 men submitted a petition on behalf of the Proctors, testifying to their character.  In May, a group of neighbors submitted a petition to the court saying the Proctors â€Å"lived Christian life in their family and were ever ready to help such as stood in need of their help,† and that they never heard or understood them to be suspected of witchcraft.  Daniel Elliot, a 27-year-old, said he’d heard from one of the accusing girls that she had cried out against Elizabeth Proctor â€Å"for sport.† Further Accusations John Proctor had also been accused during Elizabeth’s examination, and arrested and jailed for suspicion of witchcraft. Soon other family members were drawn in.  On May 21, Elizabeth and John Proctor’s daughter Sarah Proctor and Elizabeth Proctor’s sister-in-law Sarah Bassett were accused of afflicting Abigail Williams, Mary Walcott, Mercy Lewis and Ann Putnam Jr. The two Sarahs were then arrested. Two days later, Benjamin Proctor, John Proctor’s son and Elizabeth Proctor’s stepson, was accused of afflicting Mary Warren, Abigail Williams, and Elizabeth Hubbard. He was also arrested.  John and Elizabeth Proctor’s son William Proctor was accused on May 28 of afflicting Mary Walcott and Susannah Sheldon, and he was then arrested.  Thus, three of the children of Elizabeth and John Proctor were also accused and arrested, along with Elizabeth’s sister and sister-in-law. June 1692 On June 2, a physical examination of Elizabeth Proctor and some others of the accused found no signs on their bodies that they were witches. The jurors heard testimony against Elizabeth Proctor and her husband John on June 30. Depositions were submitted by Elizabeth Hubbard, Mary Warren, Abigail Williams, Mercy Lewis, Ann Putnam Jr.,  and Mary Walcott stating that they had been afflicted by the apparition of Elizabeth Proctor at various times in March and April. Mary Warren had not initially accused Elizabeth Proctor, but she did testify at the trial. Stephen Bittford also submitted a deposition against both Elizabeth Proctor and Rebecca Nurse.  Thomas and Edward Putnam submitted a petition stating that they had seen Mary Walcott, Mercy Lewis, Elizabeth Hubbard, and Ann Putnam Jr. being afflicted, and â€Å"very believe in our hearts† that it was Elizabeth Proctor who caused the afflictions.  Because the depositions of minors by themselves would not stand up in court, Nathaniel Ingersoll, Samuel Parris, and Thomas Putnam attested that they had seen these afflictions and believed them to have been done by Elizabeth Proctor. Samuel Barton and John Houghton also testified that they had been prese nt for some of the afflictions and heard the accusations against Elizabeth Proctor at the time. A deposition by Elizabeth Booth accused Elizabeth Proctor of afflicting her, and in a second deposition, she stated that on June 8 her father’s ghost appeared to her and accused Elizabeth Proctor of killing him because Booth’s mother would not send for Dr. Griggs. In a third deposition, she said that the ghost of Robert Stone Sr. and his son Robert Stone Jr. had appeared to her and said that John Proctor and Elizabeth Proctor killed them over a disagreement. A fourth deposition from Booth attested to four other ghosts that had appeared to her and accused Elizabeth Proctor of killing them, one over some cider Elizabeth Proctor had not been paid for, one for not calling a doctor as recommended by Proctor and Willard, another for not bringing apples to her, and the last for differing in judgment with a doctor; Elizabeth Proctor was accused of killing him and laming his wife. William Raimant submitted a deposition that he had been present at the house of Nathaniel Ingersoll in late March when â€Å"some of the afflicted persons† cried out against Goody Proctor and said â€Å"I’ll have her hang,† had been reproved by Mrs. Ingersoll, and then they â€Å"seemed to make a jest of it.† The court decided to formally charge the Proctors with witchcraft, on the basis of the testimony, much of which was spectral evidence. Guilty The Court of Oyer and Terminer  met on August 2 to consider the cases of Elizabeth Proctor and her husband John, among others. About this time, apparently, John rewrote his will, excluding Elizabeth probably because he expected them both to be executed. On August 5, in a trial before jurors, both Elizabeth Proctor and her husband John were found guilty and sentenced to be executed.  Elizabeth Proctor was pregnant, and so she was given a temporary stay of execution until after she would give birth.  The juries that day also convicted George Burroughs,  Martha Carrier, George Jacobs Sr., and John Willard. After this, the sheriff seized all the property of John and Elizabeth, selling or killing all their cattle and taking all their household goods, leaving their children with no means of support. John Proctor tried to avoid execution by claiming illness, but he was hanged on August 19, on the same day as the other four condemned on August 5. Elizabeth Proctor remained in jail, awaiting the birth of her child and, presumably, her own execution soon after that. Elizabeth Proctor After the Trials The  Court of Oyer and Terminer had stopped meeting in September, and there had been no new executions after September 22 when 8 had been hanged. The Governor, influenced by a group of Boston-area ministers including Increase Mather, had ordered that spectral evidence not be relied on in court from that point on and ordered on October 29 that arrests stop and that the Court of Oyer and Terminer be dissolved. In late November he established a  Superior Court of Judicature  to handle further trials. On January 27, 1693, Elizabeth Proctor gave birth in jail to a son, and she named him John Proctor III. On March 18, a group of residents petitioned on behalf of nine who had been convicted of witchcraft, including John and Elizabeth Proctor, for their exoneration. Only three of the nine were still alive, but all who had been convicted had lost their property rights and so had their heirs. Among those who signed the petition were Thorndike Proctor and Benjamin Proctor, John’s sons and Elizabeth’s stepsons.  The petition was not granted. After the wife of Governor Phipps was accused of witchcraft, he issued a general order freeing all 153 remaining prisoners accused or convicted were released from jail in May 1693, finally freeing Elizabeth Proctor.  The family had to pay for her room and board while in jail before she could actually leave the jail. She was, however, penniless.  Her husband had written a new will while in jail and had omitted Elizabeth from it, probably expecting her to be executed. Her dowry and prenuptial contract were ignored by her stepchildren, on the basis of her conviction which made her legally a non-person, even though she had been released from jail. She and her still minor children went to live with Benjamin Proctor, her eldest stepson.  The family moved to Lynn, where Benjamin in 1694 married Mary Buckley Witheridge, also imprisoned in the Salem trials. Sometime before March of 1695, John Proctor’s will was accepted by the court for probate, which means that the court treated his rights as being restored. In April his estate was divided (though we have no record of how) and his children, including those by Elizabeth Proctor, presumably had some settlement.  Elizabeth Proctor’s children Abigail and William disappear from the historical record after 1695. It was not until April of 1697, after her farm had burned, that Elizabeth Proctor’s dowry was restored to her for her use by a probate court, on a petition she filed in June 1696. Her husband’s heirs had held her dowry until that time, as her conviction had made her a legal non-person. Elizabeth Proctor remarried on September 22, 1699, to Daniel Richards of Lynn, Massachusetts. In 1702, the Massachusetts General Court declared the 1692 trials to have been unlawful.  In 1703, the legislature passed a bill reversing the attainder against John and Elizabeth Proctor and Rebecca Nurse, convicted in the trials, essentially allowing them to be considered legal persons again and file legal claims for the return of their property.  The legislature also at this time outlawed the use of spectral evidence in trials. In 1710, Elizabeth Proctor was paid 578 pounds and 12 shillings in restitution for her husband’s death. Another bill was passed in 1711 restoring rights to many of those involved in the trials, including John Proctor.  This bill gave the Proctor family 150 pounds in restitution for their incarceration and for John Proctor’s death. Elizabeth Proctor and her younger children may have moved away from Lynn after her remarriage, as there is no known record of their deaths or where they are buried. Benjamin Proctor died in Salem Village (later renamed Danvers) in 1717. A Genealogical Note Elizabeth Proctor’s grandmother, Ann Holland Bassett Burt, was married first to Roger Bassett; Elizabeth’s father William Bassett Sr. is their son.  Ann Holland Bassett remarried after John Bassett’s death in 1627, to Hugh Burt, apparently as his second wife.  John Bassett died in England.  Ann and Hugh married in Lynn, Massachusetts, in 1628.  Two to four years later, a daughter, Sarah Burt, was born in Lynn, Massachusetts.  Some genealogical sources list her as the daughter of Hugh Burt and Anne Holland Basset Burt and connect her to the Mary or Lexi or Sarah Burt married to William Bassett Sr., born about 1632.  If this connection is accurate, Elizabeth Proctor’s parents would have been half-siblings or step-siblings.  If Mary/Lexi Burt and Sarah Burt are two different persons and have been confused in some genealogies, they are likely related. Ann Holland Bassett Burt was accused of witchcraft in 1669. Motives Elizabeth Proctor’s grandmother, Ann Holland Bassett Burt, was a Quaker, and so the family may have been looked on with suspicion by the Puritan community.  She had also been accused of witchcraft in 1669, accused by, among others, a doctor, Philip Read, apparently on the basis of her skill in healing others.  Elizabeth Proctor is said in some sources to have been a healer, and some of the accusations relate to her advice on seeing doctors. The skeptical reception by John Proctor of Mary Warren’s accusation of Giles Corey may have also played a part, and then her subsequent attempt to recover from seeming to call into question the veracity of the other accusers. While Mary Warren did not participate formally in the early accusations against the Proctors, she did make formal accusations against the Proctors and many others after she herself had been accused of witchcraft by the other afflicted girls. Another likely contributing motive was that Elizabeth’s husband, John Proctor, had publicly denounced the accusers, implying that they were lying about the accusations, after his relative by marriage, Rebecca Nurse, was accused. The ability to seize the rather extensive property of the Proctors may have added to the motive to convict them. Elizabeth Proctor in  The Crucible John and Elizabeth Proctor and their servant Mary Warren are major characters in Arthur Miller’s play, The Crucible. John is portrayed as a fairly young man, in his thirties, rather than as a man in his sixties, as he was in reality. In the play, Abigail Williams is portrayed as a former servant of the Proctors and as having had an affair with John Proctor; Miller is said to have taken the incident in the transcripts of Abigail Williams trying to strike Elizabeth Proctor during the examination as evidence of this relationship. Abigail Williams, in the play, accuses Elizabeth Proctor of witchcraft to gain revenge against John for ending the affair. Abigail Williams was not, in reality, ever a servant of the Proctors and may not have known them or not known them well before she joined in the accusations after Mary Warren had already done so; Miller has Warren joining in after Williams has begun the accusations. Elizabeth Proctor in  Salem,  2014 series The name of Elizabeth Proctor is not used for any major character in the highly fictionalized WGN America TV Series, airing from 2014, called Salem. Family, Background Mother:  Mary Burt or Sarah Burt or Lexi Burt (sources differ) (1632 to 1689)Father:  Captain William Bassett Sr., of Lynn, Massachusetts (1624 to 1703)Grandmother:  Ann Holland Bassett Burt, a Quaker Siblings Mary Bassett DeRich (also accused; her son John DeRich was among the accusers though not of his mother)William Bassett Jr. (married to Sarah Hood Bassett, also accused)Elisha BassettSarah Bassett Hood (her husband Henry Hood was accused)John Bassettothers Husband John Proctor  (March 30, 1632 to August 19, 1692), married in 1674; it was her first marriage and his third. He had come from England to Massachusetts at three years old with his parents and had moved to Salem in 1666. Children William Proctor (1675 to after 1695, also accused)Sarah Proctor (1677 to 1751, also accused)Samuel Proctor (1685 to 1765)Elisha Proctor (1687 to 1688)Abigail (1689 to after 1695)Joseph (?)John (1692 to 1745) Stepchildren: John Proctor also had children by his first two wives.   His first wife, Martha Giddons, died in childbirth in 1659, the year after their first three children died. The child born in 1659, Benjamin, lived until 1717 and was accused as part of the Salem witch trials.John Proctor married his second wife, Elizabeth Thorndike, in 1662. They had seven children, born 1663 to 1672. Three or four of the seven were still living in 1692. Elizabeth Thorndike Proctor died shortly after the birth of their last, Thorndike, who was among the accused in the Salem witch trials.  Ã‚  The first child of this second marriage, Elizabeth Proctor, was married to Thomas Very.  Thomas Very’s sister, Elizabeth Very, was married to John Nurse, son of  Rebecca Nurse, who was among those executed.  Rebecca Nurse’s sister  Mary Easty  was also executed and another of her sisters,  Sarah Cloyce, accused at the same time as was Elizabeth Proctor.