Not everybody has the ability to attain liberty and justice when corruption exists. Arthur Miller, the author of the play The Crucible, corrupts several characters although the court has absolute power over the people of Salem. For example, the Putnams speak to Parris about the murders of their seven babies, and Mrs. Putnam pleads with Reverend Parris, “I take it on my soul, but who else may surely tell us what person murdered my babies? [...] They were murdered, Mr. Parris! And mark this proof! Last night my Ruth were ever so close to their little spirits; I know it, sir. For how else is she struck dumb now except some power of darkness would stop her mouth? It is a marvelous sign, Mr. Parris!” (Miller 16). Parris is concerned with his reputation; …show more content…
Even though these characters claim to be very religious, their actions demonstrate that they believe only in earthly justice and not in heavenly justice, as Christians would view it. Hence, the Putnams have the ability to attain liberty and justice despite corruption’s existence. On the other hand, Hale comes to Proctor’s house to see if Elizabeth or Proctor had any suspicious activities relating to witchcraft. After Hale tells Proctor that Abigail said the dancing in the woods had nothing to do with witchcraft, Proctor says to Hale, “I falter nothing, but I may wonder if my story will be credited in such a court. I do wonder on it, when such a steady-minded minister as you will suspicion such a woman that never lied, and cannot, and the world knows she cannot! I may falter somewhat, Mister; I am no fool” (69). Reverend Hale and John Proctor both recognize that the justice of the court is not “just” if an accusation is equal proof of guilt, and the only way you can avoid punishment is by confessing. However, Hale has a hard time believing that someone would confess to a crime they did not commit, as Proctor did. Thus, liberty and justice are not attainable when a corrupt court system