Elizabeth Richardson, Maritime Justice, and the Colonial Court Case That Failed Her (1658–1659)

In 1659, a colonial court in Maryland examined a death that never should have happened under English law.

A woman named Elizabeth Richardson had been executed at sea after being accused of witchcraft. She never reached land. She never stood before a court. And yet, unlike many others, her death did not disappear entirely.

It followed the ship to shore.

What survives today is not her story but the system that reacted to her death.

The ship was owned by merchant Edward Prescott and commanded by John Greene. And somewhere during the Atlantic crossing in 1658, Elizabeth was accused of witchcraft by members of the crew.

The records do not tell us:

• what caused suspicion

• whether there was a storm

• whether she spoke in her own defense

They only confirm the outcome.

She was hanged.

When the Ship Reached Shore

Once the ship arrived in the Chesapeake, the execution became a legal problem.

A Virginia planter, John Washington, filed a formal complaint with Maryland’s governor, Josias Fendall.

In a surviving letter dated September 29, 1659, Fendall wrote:

“Vppon yor Complaynt… I haue caused him to bee apprehended uppon suspition of ffelony.”

Prescott was arrested.

Not because the court knew who Elizabeth Richardson was but because a legal boundary may have been crossed.

At sea, authority operated differently.

Captains and shipmasters were expected to maintain order, sometimes under extreme conditions. But English law did not grant them clear authority to execute passengers - especially for crimes like witchcraft, which required formal trial.

That created a legal gray area.

When Richardson was executed at sea, the act existed outside:

• colonial courts

• local jurisdiction

• formal legal procedure

But once the ship reached Maryland, the situation changed.

Now the question was no longer whether Richardson was a witch.

The question was:

Who had the authority to kill her?

A Court Focused on Authority, Not the Victim

The Maryland Provincial Court did not investigate Elizabeth Richardson’s identity, background, or innocence.

Instead, it examined the actions of men.

Prescott’s defense survives in the record:

“…there was One Elizabeth Richardson hanged in his ship… by his Master & Company… and that… they were ready to mutiny.”

This was not a denial.

It was a justification.

Fear, disorder, and mutiny were used to explain the execution but not to question it.

The case depended on testimony.

And the man who brought the accusation, John Washington, did not appear in court.

In his reply, he explained:

“extraordinary occasions” would prevent him from attending, as his child’s baptism had already been arranged.

Without witnesses, the court could not proceed.

The record states simply:

“noe one coming to prosecute.”

Prescott was released.

No one was punished.

Why This Record Survived

Elizabeth Richardson’s case is often contrasted with that of Katherine Grady, another woman executed at sea just a few years earlier.

Grady’s case reached a Virginia court.

But those records were lost.

Richardson’s survived.

Not because her story was more important, but because of structural differences:

• Maryland maintained centralized court records

• Virginia’s records were fragmented and later destroyed in events like Bacon's Rebellion and courthouse fires

• The Maryland case generated written correspondence between officials

What survives is not a measure of importance.

It is a matter of preservation. Because the record is so limited, later sources attempt to fill the gaps.

Some genealogical accounts suggest:

• she may have been from Warton, Lancashire

• she may have been an older widow

• she may have had distant connections to the Washington family

• she may have been a Quaker

None of these claims are confirmed in the surviving court record.

They exist as interpretations, not evidence.

Elizabeth Richardson appears in the archive only because her death created a legal issue.

The court preserved:

• the complaint

• the arrest

• the defense

• the procedural failure

It did not preserve her life.

She remains, in the record:

“One Elizabeth Richardson hanged…”

That is the extent of her legal identity.

Final Thought

This case is not about whether Elizabeth Richardson was a witch. It is about how systems respond when authority is challenged.

The law did not act to protect her. It acted to evaluate the men who made decisions without it. And when that evaluation failed, the system moved on.

Sources:

• Maryland Provincial Court Proceedings, 1659
  Liber P.C.R., proceedings concerning Edward Prescott and the execution of Elizabeth Richardson.

• Fendall, Josias, Letter to John Washington, 29 September 1659
  Quoted passage regarding arrest of Edward Prescott and the requirement for face-to-face testimony.

• Washington, John, Letter to Governor Josias Fendall, 30 September 1659 Explaining inability to attend Provincial Court due to family obligations.

Primary Sources (17th Century Records):

• Maryland Provincial Court Proceedings, 1659
  Liber P.C.R. (Provincial Court Record), case concerning Edward Prescott and the execution of Elizabeth Richardson.

• Josias Fendall, Letter to John Washington, 29 September 1659
  Concerning the arrest of Edward Prescott on suspicion of felony.

• John Washington, Letter to Josias Fendall, 30 September 1659
  Explaining inability to appear in court due to family obligations and lack of witnesses.

Colonial & Legal Context:

• The Statutes of the Realm
  1 James I, c.12 (1604 Witchcraft Act) — defining witchcraft as a capital felony under English law.

• Religion and the Decline of Magic
  Context on early modern belief systems, witchcraft, and interpretations of natural events.

• The Devil in the Shape of a Woman
  Gender, power, and patterns in witchcraft accusations.

• Entertaining Satan
  Social and legal frameworks of witchcraft in early America.

Maritime & Colonial History Context:

• Witchcraft in Colonial Virginia
  Includes discussion of maritime witchcraft accusations and the Katherine Grady case.

• Early modern English maritime practice and Admiralty law (secondary historical synthesis from multiple sources)

Genealogical & Interpretive Sources:

• Genealogical accounts and family history research relating to the Washington family and 17th-century Chesapeake networks
  (including merchant activity, land ownership, and migration patterns)

• Secondary genealogical interpretations suggesting possible identity, origin, or religious affiliation of Elizabeth Richardson (including Quaker theory; not confirmed in primary record)

Archival Notes:

• Virginia colonial records from the 1650s are known to be fragmentary due to decentralized record-keeping, later courthouse fires, and events such as Bacon's Rebellion.

• Maryland, as a proprietary colony under Cecil Calvert, maintained more centralized court records, contributing to the survival of Provincial Court proceedings.