‘Should a man catch his wife in the act of adultery, and revenge himself by the death of both parties, the Mahomedan law would acquit him of murder; but, should he take the life of only one of the offenders, they would sentence him to death. The laws of the Koran, relative to trials for adultery, one would almost think were framed with the sole view of prohibiting such suits; for, whereas, in common cases, two respectable male witnesses are deemed competent to establish a fact; in cases of adultery, four male witnesses must be produced. The testimony of a thousand women would be of no avail, and that of the men must be clear and circumstantial. The smallest disagreement would invalidate the depositions of the whole. In short, such are the difficulties, or rather impossibilities, the law throws in the way of substantiating the charge, that causes of the score of adultery, or of fornication, are seldom heard of. ‘They seem not to have distinguished these two crimes by different appellations, though the punishment is different. For the first, the criminal is stoned to death; for the second, a hundred lashes are deemed an adequate punishment. So the award to a married man and unmarried woman, convicted of _zinnah,_ (a general term for unlawful co-habitation,) would be death to the man, and flagellation to the woman. Such is the law; but custom has left the injured parties to pursue private measures of revenge, in which the courts never interfere. ‘Mutual intercourse among female friends and relations is kept up by visits; for which, however, previous permission from the husbands must be obtained, except when the wife intends a visit to her parents. In such a case, she _intimates_ her intention; and, though he may dissuade, he has not the power to restrain. When first informed of this privilege, so contrary to received opinion, it excited my surprize, which I evinced by minute enquiry. The following is the answer I received from a person of rank and character: ‘A wife’ (said he) ‘is not a slave to a husband. He is her guardian, it is true; and, when she pursues a path that would lead to disgrace, it is his duty to control her, on common occasions, by advice: should that prove ineffectual, her relatives are informed of her refractoriness, and they lend their aid. If still untractable, she may be confined to her room. He may abstain from her bed; but where is the Mussulman of character that would lift his hand to the wife of his bosom? Is he devoid of all regard to his own honor, that he should treat the mother of his children with disgrace? or has he become regardless of the good opinion of his brethren? or could he, for a moment, forget that her relations, to a man, would start forward to resent an insult offered to their family? No man’ (continued he) ‘can, with impunity, oppose that general opinion which has for its foundation both propriety and justice. A wife must, therefore, be permitted to visit her parents whenever she