thering wild flowers. Having sharpened his knife, he called the lads to him; and, when he had reprimanded them for acquainting their father and mother with the scene to which they had been witnesses, said that he would immediately put them to death. Terrified by this threat, the children ran from him; but he immediately followed, and brought them back. He then placed his knee on the body of the one, while he cut the throat of the other with his penknife; and then treated the second in the same inhuman manner.

These horrid murders were committed in August, 1700, within half a mile of the castle of Edinburgh; and, as the deed was perpetrated in the middle of the day, and in the open fields, it would have been very wonderful indeed if the murderer had not been immediately taken into custody. At the very time a gentleman was walking on the Castle-hill of Edinburgh, who had a tolerably perfect view of what passed. Alarmed by the incident, he called some people, who ran with him to the place where the children were lying dead. Hunter now ad. vanced towards a river, with a view to drown himself. Those who pursued came up with him just as he reached the brink of the river; and, his person being immediately known to them, a messenger was instantly dispatched to Mr. and Mrs. Gordon, who were at that moment going to dinner with their friend, to inform them of the horrid murder of their sons. Language is too weak to describe the effects resulting from the communication of this dreadful news: the astonishment of the afflicted father, the agony of the frantic mother, may possibly be conceived, though it cannot be described.

According to an old Scottish law, it was decreed that if a murderer

should be taken with the binoa of the murdered person on his clothes, he should be prosecuted in the sneriff's court, and executed within three days after the commission of the fact. It was not common to execute this sentence with rigour; but this offender's crime was of so aggravated a nature, that it was not thought proper to remit any thing of the utmost severity of the law. The prisoner was, therefore, committed to gaol, and chained down to the floor all night; and, on the following day, the sheriff issued his precept for the jury to meet and, in consequence of their verdict, Hunter was brought to his trial, when he pleaded guilty, and added to the offence he had already committed the horrid crime of declaring that he lamented only the not having murdered Mr. Gordon's daughter

as well as his sons.

The sheriff now passed sentence on the convict, which was to the following purpose: that, 'on the succeeding day, he should be executed on a gibbet, erected for that purpose, on the spot where he had committed the murders; but that, previous to his execution, his right hand should be cut off near the wrist; that then he should be drawn up to the gibbet by a rope; and, when he was dead, hung in chains between Edinburgh and Leith: the knife with which he committed the murders being stuck thro' his hand, which should be advanced over his head, and fixed therewith to the top of the gibbet. Mr. Hunter was executed, in strict conformity to the above sentence, on the 22d of August, 1700: but Mr. Gordon soon afterwards petitioned the sheriff that the body might be removed to a more distant spot, as its hanging on the side of the highway, through which he frequently passed, tende1 to re-excite his grief for the occasion

that had first given rise to it. This requisition was immediately complied with, and, in a few days, the body was removed to the skirts of a small village, near Edinburgh, named Broughton.

It is equally true, and horrid to relate, that, at the place of execution, Hunter closed his life with the following shocking declaration:There is no God-I do not be lieve there is any; or, if there is, I hold him in defiance. Yet this infidel had been regarded as a minister of the Gospel!

A few serious and important reflections will naturally occur to the mind on perusing this melancholy narrative. Mr. Hunter was educated in a manner greatly superior to the vulgar; and he was of a profession that ought to have set an example of virtue, instead of a pattern of vice: yet neither his education nor profession could actuate as preventive remedies against a crime the most abhorrent to all the feelings of humanity.

His first offence, great as it was, could be considered as no other than a prologue to the dismal tragedy that ensued; a tragedy that was attended with almost every possible circumstance of aggravation; for Mr. and Mrs. Gordon had done nothing to him that could tempt him to any thoughts of revenge; and the children were too young to have offended him, even in intention: they simply mentioned to their parents a circumstance that to them appeared somewhat extraordinary; and which, Mr. Hunter's character

and situation considered. was in. deed of a very extraordinary natare: yet in revenge of this suppos ed affront did he resolve to imbrue his hands in the blood of the unoffending innocents.

If we reject on the conduct of Mr. and Mrs. Gordon in discharging the young woman who was guilty of a violation of the laws of decency, and retaining in their family the principal ofender, we must own that their partiality was ill founded: this, however, most be ascribed to the veneration in which clergymen are universally held, and the particular regard that was shown towards them in Scotland at the commencement of the last century. Still, however, it is an aggravation of Hunter's crime, who ought to have been grateful in proportion as he was favoured.

It is a shocking part of Hunter's story that he was one of a society of abandoned young fellows, who occasionally assembled to ridicule the scriptures, and make a mockery of the being and attributes of God! Is it then to be wondered that this wretch fell an example of the exemplary justice of Divine Providence? Perhaps a fate no less dreadful attended many of his companions: but, their histories have not reached our hands,

There is something so indescrib. ably shocking in denying the existence of that God in whom we live, move, and have our being,' that it is amazing any man who feels that he did not create himself can be an Atheist.

gentleman, who lodged at an inn near Aldgate, and who went into the house of Van Berghen about eight o'clock in the evening, and continued to drink there till about eleven. Finding himself rather intoxicated, he desired the maid servant to call a coach to carry him home. As she was going to do so her mistress whispered her, and bid her return in a little time, and say that a coach was not to be procured. These directions being observed, Norris, on the maid's return, resolved to go without a coach, and accordingly took his leave of the family; but he had not gone far before he discovered that he had been robbed of a purse containing a sum of money; where upon he returred, and charged Van Berghen and his wife with having been guilty of the robbery. This they positively denied, and threatened to turn him out of the house; but he refused to go, and resolutely went into a room where the cloth was laid for supper.

At this time Dromelius entered the room, and, threatening Mr. Norris in a cavalier manner, the latter resented the insult, and at length a quarrel ensued. At this juncture Van Berghen seized a poker, with which he fractured Mr. Norris's skull, and in the mean time Dromelius stabbed him in different parts of the body, Mrs. Van Berghen being present during the perpetration of the horrid act. When Mr. Norris was dead they stripped him of his coat, waistcoat, hat, wig, &c. and then Van Berghen and Dromelius carried the body, and threw it into a ditch which communicated with the Thames; and in the mean time Mrs. Van Berghen washed the

blood of the deceased from the floor of the room. The clothes, which had been stripped from the deceased, were put up in a hamper, and com mitted to the care of Dromelius, who took a boat, and carried them over to Rotherhithe, where he employed the waterman to carry the hamper to lodgings which he had taken, and in which he proposed to remain until he could find a favorable opportunity of embarking for Holland.

The next morning, at low water, the body of a man was found, and several of the neighbours went to take a view of it, and endeavoured to try if they could trace any blood to the place where the murder might have been committed; but, not succeeding in this, some of them, who were up at a very early hour, recollected that they had seen Van Berghen and Dromelius coming almost from the spot where the body was found, and remarked that a light had been carried backwards and forwards in Van Berghen's house. Upon this the house was searched; but no discovery was made, except that a little blood was found behind the door of a room, which appeared to have been lately mopped. Inquiry was made after Dromelius, but Van Berghen and his wife would give no other account than he had left their service: on which they were taken into custody, with the servant maid, who was the principal evidence against them. At this time the waterman who had carried Dromelius to Rotherhithe, and who knew him very well, appeared, and he was likewise taken into custody. The prisoners were tried by a jury of half Englishmen and half foreigners, to whom all the circum

stances above mentioned appeared so striking, that they did not hesitate to find the prisoners guilty; and accordingly they received sentence of death.

After condemnation, and a short time before the day of execution, Dromelius assured the Ordinary of Newgate that the murder was committed by himself, and that it was preceded and followed by these circumstances, viz. :-Mr. Norris being very much in liquor, and de. sirous of going to his inn, Mr. Van Berghen directed him to attend him thither: soon after they left the house, Norris went into a broken building, where, using opprobrious language to Dromelius, and attempt. ing to draw his sword, he wrested it from his hand, and stabbed him with it in several places: that this being done, Norris groaned very much; and Dromelius hearing a watchman coming, and fearing a discovery, drew a knife, cut his throat, and thereby put an end to his life. In answer to this it was said, that the story was altogether improbable; for if Mr. Norris had been killed in the manner above mentioned, some blood would have been found on the spot, and there would have been holes in his clothes from the stabbing; neither of which was the case. Still, however, Dromelius persisted in his declaration, with a view to save the life of his mistress, with whom he was thought to have an improper connexion.

them all. Mr. Van Berghen, unable to speak intelligibly in English, conversed in Latin; from which it may be inferred that he had been educated in a style superior to the rank of life which he had lately held. He said that the murder was not committed in his house, and that be knew no more of it than that Dromelius came to him while he lay in bed, informed him that he had wounded the gentleman, and begged him to aid his escape; but that, when he knew Mr. Norris was murdered, he offered money to some persons to pursue the murderer: this, however, was not proved on his trial. Mrs. Van Berghen also solemnly declared that she knew nothing of the murder till after it was perpetrated, which was not in their house; that Dromelius coming into the chamber, and saying he had murdered the gentleman, she went for the hamper to hold the bloody clothes, and assisted Dromelius in his escape, a circumstance which would not be deemed criminal in her country. This was, however, an artful plea; for, in Holland, accessories, before or after the fact, are accounted as principals.

Dromelius, when at the place of execution, persisted in his former tale; but desired the prayers of the surrounding multitude, whom he warned to beware of the indulgence of violent passions, to which he then fell an untimely sacrifice. They suffered near the Hartshorn brewhouse, East Smithfield, being the nearest convenient spot to the place where the murder was committed, on the 10th of July, in the year 1700. The bodies of the men were hung in

chains, between Bow and Mile-end; but the woman was buried.

The denial by this unhappy couple of the crime, at the very moment their souls must appear before the Almighty, and after such clear proof, on which a jury, one half composed of their own countrymen, without hesitation found them guilty, greatly adds to their turpitude.

From the above narrative an important lesson may be learnt, particularly by our country readers. Mr. Norris was a country gentle man: the house kept by Van Berghen was, at the best, of very doubtful fame. Country gentlemen, when called to London on business, should be particularly cautious never to enter such a house. If this unhappy man had gone only where business

called him, he might have escaped the fatal catastrophe that befel him, and have long lived to bless his family and friends, and do credit to his country.

In the discovery of this murder the intervention of Providence is obvious. Every possible care was taken to conceal it ; yet blood was found in the room where the murder was committed; and the thoughtlessness of Dromelius respecting the waterman contributed to lead to a ready discovery of the fact. No thing is hid from the all-seeing eye of God. Let the righteous justice executed on the malefactors above mentioned impress on the minds of our readers the force of the sixth commandment:-Thou shalt do no MURDER.'

THE next criminal that particularly calls our attention was of a noble family in Scotland, a murderer of the worst description; yet in whose fate we have an extraor dinary dispensation of Providence in permitting his flight from justice, and granting him a long life after his conviction of this horrid crime; to the end, without doubt, of giving time for repentance to so great a sinner.

Alexander Balfour was born in the year 1687, at the seat of his father, Lord Burleigh, near Kinross, He was first sent for education to a village called Orwell, near the place of his birth, and thence to the University of St. Andrew's, where he pursued his studies with a diligence and success that greatly distinguish

ed him. His father had intended to have sent him to join the army in Flanders, under the command of the Duke of Malborough, in which he

had rational expectation of his rising to preferment, as he was related to the Duke of Argyle and the Earl of Stair, who were majors-general in the army; but this scheme unhap pily did not take place. Mr. Balfour, while at his father's house during a vacation at the university, became enamoured of Miss Anne Robertson, who officiated as teacher to his sisters. This young lady was possessed of considerable talents, improved by a superior education; but Lord Burleigh being apprised of the connexion between her and his son, she was discharged, and the young gentleman sent to make the tour of France and Italy. Before he went abroad, he sent the young lady a letter, informing her that, if she married before his return, he would murder her husband. Notwithstanding this threat, which she might presume had its origin in ungovernable passion, she married Mr.