according to the judgment of Heaven. Inadvertent and redeemable offences were determined by (the circumstances of) each particular case[1].
13. When hearing a case requiring the application of any of the five punishments, (the judge) was required to have respect to the affection between father and son[2], or the righteousness between ruler and minister[3] (which might have been in the mind of the defendant), to balance his own judgment He must consider the gravity or lightness (of the offence), and carefully try to fathom the capacity (of the offender) as shallow or deep, to determine the exact character (of his guilt). He must exert his intelligence to the utmost, and give the fullest play to his generous and loving feeling, to arrive at his final judgment. If the criminal charge appeared to him doubtful, he was to take the multitude into consultation with him; and if they also doubted, he was to pardon the defendant. At the same time he was to examine analogous cases, great and small, and then give his decision.
14. The evidence in a criminal case having thus been all taken and judgment given, the clerk reported it all to the director (of the district), who heard it and reported it to the Grand minister of Crime.
He also heard it in the outer court[4], and then reported it to the king, who ordered the three ducal ministers,
- ↑ Vol. iii, pp. 260-263. The compilers in this part evidently had some parts of the Shû before them.
- ↑ Which might make either party conceal the guilt of the other.
- ↑ Which might in a similar way affect the evidence.
- ↑ The text says, "Under the Zizyphus trees." These were planted in the outer court of audience, and under them the different ministers of the court had their places.
