'and I shall sleep on the terrace, under the vinearbour.' As he expected, about midnight the woman crept stealthily to him, bringing the bag of money, and begging him to keep her secret. He did so, and the next morning gave the man his money, but would answer no questions as to how he got it."1

Not only the diviners, but also some of the sheikhs, when acting formally as judges, show the utmost sagacity in turning the superstition both of Fellahheen, and also of the almost equally ignorant Belladeen, or townspeople, to judicial account. Amongst the numerous stories told in Palestine of these clever and cunning officials is that of the shrewd old sheikh Abdu'l Hâdy, a former governor of Nablus, the ancient Shechem. There had been a robbery of one of the shops in the town, and the culprit could not be discovered. So, to the amazement of all, the old governor gave orders for the shop door to be taken down, and, then and there, soundly bastinadoed, whilst he stood by to watch. the solemn administration of the punishment. As might well be supposed, a wondering crowd gathered around, which continued to increase as the news of the extraordinary proceeding was carried through the town, until nearly all the inhabitants, with many an exclamation of "Wonderful!" "Mashallah!" "What hath God wrought," "God is great," had assembled to see the execution of this strange sentence. Then

1 The Land and the Book, by W. M. Thomson, D.D., pp. 153, 154. London: T. Nelson & Sons, 1875.

Abdu'l Hâdy, the governor, bent over the door, and in the hearing of all the people demanded to know who had entered it? Who had stolen the goods? He now inclined his ear to catch the answer, and then rising up and turning to the astonished crowd said, "The door declares that it was done by a man who has a cobweb on the top of his tarboosh." The men all turned to scrutinise each other's headgear, but one man instinctively raised his hand to feel the top of his tarboosh. The wily old governor, who was on the look-out, had him seized at once, and the man in his amazement confessed that he was the thief.

What a light this story throws on the life-like character of that truly Eastern scene, Solomon's judgment.1 If he had not been, as I have said all the Kings of Israel and Judah were, virtually a despot, his command to cut the child in two and to give half to each of the contending women would have caused no sudden alarm, and would have failed to elicit the loud outcry which effectually settled this extraordinary trial. Eastern judges, in the ruses to which they resort, play, in most instances, upon the superstition, the fear, or the greed of the people, but Solomon struck one of the noblest chords of the human heart. Here were two reckless women of ill-fame, and each swore that the child was hers. As they had been alone in the house from its birth, there was not the slightest evidence which could

be called by either, and the case appeared utterly inscrutable. Solomon, too, was no cunning, shrewd old judge, but a very youthful and inexperienced one, suddenly called to preside, like every Oriental sovereign, over the court of final appeal. But by Divine wisdom he proved equal to the occasion. He knew the inextinguishable strength of the maternal instinct, even in a sensual and animal nature, but which is nowhere so powerful as in the East. "Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb ?"an Eastern woman, and that in the case of “a manchild!" He knew-and this, too, was wonderful readiness of wisdom in the young judge-that grief can be better simulated than love, and so he cries, "Bring me a sword. . . . Divide the living child in two, and give the half to the one and the half to the other," and the real mother is seen in a moment.

.

In this summary, rough and ready mode of trial, the accused is cleverly compelled to incriminate himself, which is, like everything else, the opposite of our procedure. But it must be confessed that it has immense advantages, being simple, expeditious, inexpensive, and effectual. This treatment of difficult cases, where the judge has to be detective, witness, solicitor, counsel, and court all in one, is rightly regarded to this hour as an evidence of the greatest ability, and calls forth still the same respect and admiration as it did in Solomon's case, when "all

1 Isa. xlix. 15; Job iii. 3.