it was always thought to exert an influence over his future destiny.  Such was the origin of many of our later superstitions, which “grew with their growth, and strengthened with their strength,” till the more extensive introduction of the art of printing partly dissipated the illusion.  It has been remarked, therefore, that the existence of the parent stock of the subject more immediately under our consideration, witchcraft, may be traced to a very remote period indeed.  It is, however, needless to enter into any remarks on those witches mentioned in the Scriptures.  The earliest dabbler of the genus, as a contemporary writer observes, is said to be Zoroaster, thought to be the king of the Bactrians, who flourished about 3,800 years ago, or A.M. 2000.  He is supposed to have been well versed in the arts of divination and astrology, and was the origin of the Persian magi.  “At his birth,” remarks an old writer, “he laughed; and his head did so beat, that it struck back the midwife’s hand—­a good sign of abundance of spirits, which are the best instruments of a ready wit.”  The magi in Persia, the Brahmins in India, the Chaldae in Assyria, the magicians of Arabia, the priesthood of Egypt, Greece, and Rome, and the Druids of Britain, were all members of a class which comprised astrology, omens, divination, conjuration, portents, chiromancy, and sorcery; and all united in the pursuit of enslaving mankind for the purposes of gain and power, with artfully devised schemes, and a skilful series of impostures; and we can easily imagine the influence they must have exercised over the minds of their proselytes, when we bear in mind the effect produced by similar contrivances in later days.  The enchantress Theoris of Athens seems to have been the first witch that had recourse to charms.  Demosthenes uses the terms both of witchery and imposture in speaking of her.  This witch was put to death by the Athenians—­an accomplice having displayed to them the charms, &c., by which she wrought her miracles.  Our Saviour’s words, that faith can remove mountains, are applicable particularly to the supposed powers of witchcraft; and the influence of charms and amulets in averting disease is well known.  We have alluded, in our first paper, to the trial of Rose Cullender and Amy Duny, at Norwich, for witchcraft; and we now give the speech of Sir Thomas Browne, the celebrated physician of that period, (1664,) to whom, in consequence of defect in the proof, the case was referred, which was the cause of their conviction.  Sir Thomas Browne offered it as his opinion, “that the devil, in such cases, did work upon the bodies of men and women, upon a natural foundation, (that is) to stir up and excite such humours superabounding in their bodies to a great excess, whereby he did, in an extraordinary manner, afflict them with such distempers as their bodies were most subject to, as particularly appeared in the children of Dorothy Dunent, (one of the indictments against the prisoners being for their bewitchment;) for he conceived that these swooning fits were natural, and nothing else but that they call the mother, but only heightened to a great excess by the subtilty of the devil co-operating with the malice of these, which we term witches, at whose instance he doth the villanies.”