What do you think?
Rate this book
The Driftless Connecticut Series & Garnet Books
The Case of the Piglet's Paternity: Trials from the New Haven Colony, 1639–1663
A vivid series of trials from America's earliest days
In the middle of the seventeenth century, judges in the short-lived New Haven Colony presided over a remarkable series of trials ranging from murder and bestiality, to drunken sailors, frisky couples, faulty shoes, and shipwrecks. The cases were reported in an unusually vivid manner, allowing readers to witness the twists and turns of fortune as the participants battled with life and liberty at stake. When the records were eventually published in the 1850s, they were both difficult to read and heavily edited to delete sexual matters. Rendered here in modernized English and with insightful commentary by eminent Judge Jon C. Blue, the New Haven trials allow readers to immerse themselves in the exciting legal battles of America's earliest days.
The Case of the Piglet's Paternity assembles thirty-three of the most significant and intriguing trials of the period. As a book that examines a distinctive judicial system from a modern legal perspective, it is sure to be of interest to readers in law and legal history. For less litigious readers, Blue offers a worm's eye view of the full spectrum of early colonial society―political leaders and religious dissidents, farmhands and apprentices, women and children.
In the middle of the seventeenth century, judges in the short-lived New Haven Colony presided over a remarkable series of trials ranging from murder and bestiality, to drunken sailors, frisky couples, faulty shoes, and shipwrecks. The cases were reported in an unusually vivid manner, allowing readers to witness the twists and turns of fortune as the participants battled with life and liberty at stake. When the records were eventually published in the 1850s, they were both difficult to read and heavily edited to delete sexual matters. Rendered here in modernized English and with insightful commentary by eminent Judge Jon C. Blue, the New Haven trials allow readers to immerse themselves in the exciting legal battles of America's earliest days.
The Case of the Piglet's Paternity assembles thirty-three of the most significant and intriguing trials of the period. As a book that examines a distinctive judicial system from a modern legal perspective, it is sure to be of interest to readers in law and legal history. For less litigious readers, Blue offers a worm's eye view of the full spectrum of early colonial society―political leaders and religious dissidents, farmhands and apprentices, women and children.
- GenresNonfictionHistory
282 pages, Hardcover
First published July 8, 2015
6 people are currently reading
35 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
October 8, 2021
Just happen to be doing statutory interpretation in school right now so this was a great companion, was able to apply a lot of what I’ve learned. Thanks to Judge Blue for making this available, a real treasure to students of law and history
May 13, 2019
Jon Blue, who has both an undergraduate degree in history and long years of experience as a Connecticut appellate judge, fortuitously rediscovered a series of early colonial court cases from the mid-17th century New Haven Colony, which at the time was virtually an independent jurisdiction. Blue emphasizes that the only law truly recognized by the New Haven judges was that of the Bible, though he also stresses that these judges often used good common sense when trying to come to a decision, especially in civil cases where Scripture provided little specific guidance.
Blue’s intent was to make accessible to a 21st-century general reader a representative 33 sample cases from the surviving records, modernizing spelling and attempting to clear up uncertainties in the text while also trying to “retain the original’s distinctive voice.” (23) Each story is then followed by a short commentary in which Blue discusses the trial “from a modern legal perspective.” (24) Depending on the depth of one’s interest in legal history—and my own is fairly high—the retelling of these trials can be either lively and provocative or dull and overlong.
One weakness is that Blue’s decent knowledge of the Bible is not up to the level of the New Haven judges. For instance, in the eponymous bestiality case, “The Piglet’s Paternity,” Blue doesn’t realize that the judges attempt to get a confession from the offender by using the formula “give glory to God,” a phrase successfully used by Joshua to gain a confession from Achan before the malefactor and his family are stoned and burned. (Joshua 7: 19)
In a second bestiality case, Blue commends the judges for coming up with something like the modern law of attempt (that is, even attempting an unsuccessful crime will be punished), though in that case, according to Blue, the inability of the accused to commit the crime allowed the judges spare him the death penalty. But it is more likely that judges spared the accused because there was only one witness to “the full act of bestiality,” not the “two or three” required by Deuteronomy 17: 6 to pronounce a death sentence.
Blue also commends the court for granting a divorce to a woman whose husband had disappeared and was also probably a bigamist. Blue thinks the divorce demonstrates that the judges could move beyond Jesus’ injunction that what “God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (220) Blue does not consider other biblical passages about divorce, including two statements by Jesus that arguably permit divorce on grounds of sexual immorality. (Matthew 5:32, Matthew 19:9)
Finally, although Blue tries his best not to treat the judges’ decisions anachronistically, his short commentaries at the end of chapters sometimes struck me as overly smug reflections about the inferiority of 17th century New Haven justice when compared with the enlightenment of our own era. While unwilling to see any modern elementary school children sold into slavery for committing arson, I several times ended up rooting for the New Haven judges, muttering to myself that they had been more perceptive than Blue.
Blue’s intent was to make accessible to a 21st-century general reader a representative 33 sample cases from the surviving records, modernizing spelling and attempting to clear up uncertainties in the text while also trying to “retain the original’s distinctive voice.” (23) Each story is then followed by a short commentary in which Blue discusses the trial “from a modern legal perspective.” (24) Depending on the depth of one’s interest in legal history—and my own is fairly high—the retelling of these trials can be either lively and provocative or dull and overlong.
One weakness is that Blue’s decent knowledge of the Bible is not up to the level of the New Haven judges. For instance, in the eponymous bestiality case, “The Piglet’s Paternity,” Blue doesn’t realize that the judges attempt to get a confession from the offender by using the formula “give glory to God,” a phrase successfully used by Joshua to gain a confession from Achan before the malefactor and his family are stoned and burned. (Joshua 7: 19)
In a second bestiality case, Blue commends the judges for coming up with something like the modern law of attempt (that is, even attempting an unsuccessful crime will be punished), though in that case, according to Blue, the inability of the accused to commit the crime allowed the judges spare him the death penalty. But it is more likely that judges spared the accused because there was only one witness to “the full act of bestiality,” not the “two or three” required by Deuteronomy 17: 6 to pronounce a death sentence.
Blue also commends the court for granting a divorce to a woman whose husband had disappeared and was also probably a bigamist. Blue thinks the divorce demonstrates that the judges could move beyond Jesus’ injunction that what “God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (220) Blue does not consider other biblical passages about divorce, including two statements by Jesus that arguably permit divorce on grounds of sexual immorality. (Matthew 5:32, Matthew 19:9)
Finally, although Blue tries his best not to treat the judges’ decisions anachronistically, his short commentaries at the end of chapters sometimes struck me as overly smug reflections about the inferiority of 17th century New Haven justice when compared with the enlightenment of our own era. While unwilling to see any modern elementary school children sold into slavery for committing arson, I several times ended up rooting for the New Haven judges, muttering to myself that they had been more perceptive than Blue.
November 20, 2022
I really enjoyed this book! It was a great look into the minds of the people of Puritan New Haven, including my ancestors, the Tuttles, who were mentioned twice in the book, much to my excitement. I will say however, for people that are triggered by child abuse and sexism, this may not be the book for you. In the eyes of the Puritan, this was normal, but to the modern reader, it's disgusting (and it really is disgusting, no matter when it happened.) Just be prepared for it if you read this book.
October 24, 2017
A fascinating, often sad book that gives glimpses into the moral, legal and religious life of the New Haven Colony in the mid-seventeenth century. The modern commentary and comparisons to today’s law add to it’s interest.
August 29, 2018
I really appreciated the very short chapters. I almost felt like I was in high school again, and the teacher wants the students to read a primary source, but knows the students won't get it. So they paraphrase it for them, with a quote or two, then explain how it's all messed up anyway.
April 7, 2019
Fascinating a book and very interesting and revealing trials! Very relatable, not academic, though sometimes moralistic
February 22, 2023
Being from New Haven I probably found this more interesting than most people would. I enjoyed the historical record of the area's earliest days.
March 19, 2017
An interesting look at some actual cases from the early days of the judicial system in pre-USA New Haven, CT.
December 15, 2015
Some of these cases could be interesting, but the author doesn't do much to make them readable; instead it's just a play-by-play "John said this" then "Mary said this" then "the Court said this." He's added little or no historical research to frame the cases in a social and historical context: it reads more like a fourth grade book report than the adult analysis and synthesis you'd expect of a working judge.
More damning, however, is his preachy, judgemental commentary on whether the Court did well in dispensing justice -- a justice defined according to 21st Century Liberal standards. He doesn't permit the New Haven Colony Court to judge cases within its laws and cultural modes: instead, he tut-tuts about how awful it is that they applied religion-based standards to the cases at hand. He expresses his disapproval of the way children (age 12+) are treated by the Court and by employers and parents, without providing or even utilizing any knowledge of a social context that didn't consider individuals in that age range to be children. While we may have a justice system based on governmental non-interference in religion (though many of our laws still are based on Christian norms), the New Haven Colony was specifically established as a group of people with similar religious needs and attitudes. By high-handedly judging them for dispensing justice according to *their own* constitutive goals, Blue denies them the right to build their OWN society. A more interesting story, which Blue doesn't tell, would be to look at evolution toward the contemporary standard, or look at ways in which the Court bucked the colony's founding norms. This is just voyeurism.
More damning, however, is his preachy, judgemental commentary on whether the Court did well in dispensing justice -- a justice defined according to 21st Century Liberal standards. He doesn't permit the New Haven Colony Court to judge cases within its laws and cultural modes: instead, he tut-tuts about how awful it is that they applied religion-based standards to the cases at hand. He expresses his disapproval of the way children (age 12+) are treated by the Court and by employers and parents, without providing or even utilizing any knowledge of a social context that didn't consider individuals in that age range to be children. While we may have a justice system based on governmental non-interference in religion (though many of our laws still are based on Christian norms), the New Haven Colony was specifically established as a group of people with similar religious needs and attitudes. By high-handedly judging them for dispensing justice according to *their own* constitutive goals, Blue denies them the right to build their OWN society. A more interesting story, which Blue doesn't tell, would be to look at evolution toward the contemporary standard, or look at ways in which the Court bucked the colony's founding norms. This is just voyeurism.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews