enmity, or have cast upon him anything with out lying in wait, or with any stone, where with a man may die, seeing him not, and cast it upon him that he die, and was not his enemy neither sought him harm; " in mod ern phrase, if the killing was accidental and if no motive appears for the crime, " then the gemot shall judge between the slayer and the avenger of the blood according to these judgments." The assembly or gemot having taken the slayer from his city of ref uge and placed him on trial, and having found him innocent of murder, " the gemot shall deliver the slayer out of the hand of the avenger of the blood, and the gemot shall restore him to the city of his refuge, whither he was fled. " He was sent back as he had been taken, under escort, to protect him from the avenger, and delivered to the authorities of the city of refuge, " and he shall abide in it unto the death of the high priest which was anointed with the sacred oil." The death of the high priest was ifso fació a declaration of amnesty, all persons in the cities of refuge then returned to their habi tations and the avenger of the blood was for bidden to do them harm. If he killed a slayer after the period of amnesty he was guilty of murder and suffered death. Bibli cal critics have been puzzled to understand why the death of the king was not made the period of amnesty, and many suppose that this law was not promulgated until after the return from the Babylonian captivity, at a time when the kingship had for the time dis appeared and all the high powers were vested in the high priest. The ancient rights of the avenger of the blood were not entirely abrogated, and the manslayer in the city of refuge had to take care to remain within its boundaries, for " if the manslayer shall at any time come with out the border of the city of his refuge whither he was fled, and the avenger of the blood find him without the borders of the city of his refuge, and the avenger of the blood kill the slayer, he shall not be guiltyi
of blood." The avenger was not punishable for this act and the refugee was himself re sponsible for his death, because he should have remained in the city of his refuge until the death of the high priest, " but after the death of the high priest the manslayer shall return to the land of his possession." Having concluded the law concerning the city of refuge, the code proceeds to the statement of the law closely connected with it, and there follow three important regula tions changing the old law in most vital par ticulars. Before the establishment of courts of general jurisdiction in Palestine and the adoption of rules of procedure, various cus toms prevailed in different portions of the land. As regards the evidence upon which a murderer was condemned, one witness and circumstantial facts were sufficient to con vict. Even the trial by casting lots was in vogue. The rule entitling the prisoner to the benefit of the presumption of innocence was unknown. And furthermore, having been proven guilty, the murderer could com promise with the kinfolk of the dead man by paying blood money and thus ransom himself. All this was changed by the Mo saic Codes. Our statute speaks thus : "And these things shall be for you a stat ute of judgment throughout your genera tions in all your dwellings : — Whoso killeth any person the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses : but one witness shall not testify against a person to cause him to die. "Moreover ye shall take no redemption money for the life of a murderer which is guilty of death : but he shall surely be put to death. "And ye shall take no redemption money for him that is fled to his city of refuge, that he should come again to dwell in the land until the death of the high priest." The last provision was evidently intended to prevent trouble between the avenger .of the blood and the slayer. The former on see ing the latter might be enraged and kill him
