Stoll ("Suggestion und Hypnotismus," Zweite Auflage, 416), in commenting on the atrocious witch trial at Zug, Switzerland, in 1737, points out how completely the learned judges stood under the spell of the universal witchcraft belief of their times.  Their judgment was so thoroughly warped that they could not detect in the testimony of the accused the convincing note of truth, nor recognize how perfectly the account of themselves the poor women gave tallied with their circumstances.  Among the effects of Kathri Gilli was a small bag of white powder.  Her accuser declared it was a poison used for the malicious destruction of cattle, whereas Kathri explained that it was oat flour.  Some of it was given to a dog without ill effects.  Kathri offered to prove the harmlessness of this powder by partaking of it herself.  Nevertheless, the experienced judges were so obsessed by the witchcraft superstition that they saw no convincing proof in the experiment with the dog, failed to draw a rational conclusion from the agreement between the assertion of Kathri and the outcome of the experiment, and deemed the rack a likelier means of eliciting the truth of the matter than testing the powder on Kathri herself! (Ross)