whose mouth it comes dry, or stained with blood, are deemed guilty, while those who are capable of returning it in a pulpy form, are at once pronounced innocent. When we reflect upon the superstitious state of these people, and at the same time, consider the influence which the mind, under such circumstances, is capable of producing upon the functions of the body, it is impossible not to admit that the ordeals above described are capable of assisting the ends of justice, and of leading to the detection of guilt. The accused, conscious of his own innocence, will fear no ill effects from the magical potation, but will cheerfully acquiesce in the ordeal; whereas the guilty person, from the mere uneasiness and dread of his own mind, will, if narrowly watched, most probably discover some symptoms of bodily indisposition, before the expiration of the period of his probation. In the case of the ordeal by _rice_, a result, in correspondence with the justice of the case, may be fairly anticipated on the soundest principle of physiology. There is perhaps no secretion that is more immediately influenced by the passions than that of saliva. The sight of a delicious repast to a hungry man is not more effectual in exciting the salivary secretion, than is the operation of fear and anxiety in repressing and suspending it. If the reader be a medical practitioner, we refer him for an illustration to the feelings which he experienced during his examination before the medical colleges; and if he be a barrister, he may remember with what a parched lip he gave utterance to his first address to the jury. Is it then unreasonable to believe that a person under the influence of conscious guilt, will be unable, from the dryness of his mouth, to surrender the rice in that soft state, which an innocent individual, with an undiminished supply of saliva, will so easily accomplish?