work comprises in many large volumes about all that is known of the writings of the Sage.
The bulk of this extensive work consists in obscure allusions to things no doubt familiar in his time, but now obsolete; and in meaningless fine distinctions and references to the "Rules," "Forms," and such things that have but little significance to the modern reader. But the gist of the matter may be summed up in one short sentence: "Walk in the old paths." And when we come to define the old paths we find what he called the "Five Relations," under which he defines every known duty of man. These "Relations" had been defined and enforced ages before, in the books called the Classics, perhaps for the reason that they were so old that no one knew when or by whom written. It is these five propositions that have called forth dozens of folio volumes to elucidate and enforce. And it is these that constitute what is known as Confucianism, although he never originated them nor claimed to be other than a teacher of the faith of the ancients.
These five relations have in them an entire code of political and social economy of the highest order.
First Relation; King and Subject.—Kung, in harmony with the established form of government under which he lived, was an advocate of absolute monarchy. The fact that he had a tinge of royal blood in his own body may have unconsciously influenced his judgment on this point. At all events, he left no indication of any disapproval of the system. He favored paternal government, both for the nation and in the family. The patriarchal plan has always been followed out in China to the fullest detail. The Emperor is as the father of the big family, and there is no appeal from his authority. The question of how the reigning monarch attained his position is not taken into consideration. The fact that he is on the throne is sufficient to secure the most absolute and abject obedience to his mandates. Kung set forth certain wholesome rules which should control his actions in the belief that the subject as well as the ruler had rights. He sought to supersede kingship by force with kingship by fitness. The civil government being a counterpart to the family government, the rules or principles obtaining in one should be equally applied in the other. The subject should love the king as the son loves the father, not for the enemies he might have made, but because of a righteous administration of the affairs of the country. He gave no countenance to a divided household. No rival political parties, appealing by bribes of office, nor threats of non-support at the next election, could disturb the serenity of the rulers or ruled. No penalties for treason, where a government was so good that none could find fault, were needed; and, in the event of individ-
