about the choosing of? Should it not be the proper men? What should you deal with the most reverently? Should it not be punishments? What should you calculate the most carefully? Should it not be to whom these will reach?
'When both parties are present, (with their documents and witnesses) all complete, let the judges listen to the fivefold statements that may be made[1]. When they have examined and fully made up their minds on those, let them adjust the case to one of the five punishments. If the five punishments do not meet it, let them adjust it to one of the five redemption-fines; and if these, again, are not sufficient for it, let them reckon it among the five cases of error[2].
'In (settling) the five cases of error there are evils (to be guarded against);—being warped by the influence of power, or by private grudge, or by female solicitation, or by bribes, or by applications. Any one of these things should be held equal to the crime (before the judges). Do you carefully examine, and prove yourselves equal to (every difficulty).
'When there are doubts as to the infliction of any of the five punishments, that infliction should be forborne. When there are doubts as to the
- ↑ That is, the statements, with the evidence on both sides, whether incriminating or exculpating. They are called fivefold, as the case might have to be dealt with by one or other of 'the five punishments.'
- ↑ That is, the offences of inadvertence. What should ensue on the adjudication of any case to be so ranked does not appear. It would be very leniently dealt with, and perhaps pardoned. In 'the Counsels of Yü,' Kâo-yâo says to Shun, 'You pardon inadvertent offences however great.'
