CHAPTER III.

COURTS OF JUDICATURE, LEGAL PROCEEDINGS, AND CRIMINAL LAW OF THE JEWS.

SECTION I.

JEWISH COURTS OF JUDICATURE AND LEGAL PROCeedings.1

Seat of Justice.-II. Inferior Tribunals.—III. Appeals.—Constitution of the Sanhedrin or Great Council.-IV. Time of Trials.-Form of legal Proceedings among the Jews.-1. Citation of the Parties.-2, 3. Form of Pleading in civil and criminal Cases.-4. Witnesses.-Oaths.-5. The Lot, in what Cases used judicially.-6. Forms of Acquittal.-7. Summary Justice, sometimes clamorously demanded.—V. Execution of Sentences, by whom and in what manner performed.

or less honourable place in the synagogue. And the context shows, that judges and judicial causes were the subjects of the apostle's thoughts.

II. On the settlement of the Israelites in the land of Canaan, Moses commanded them to appoint judges and officers in all their gates, throughout their tribes (Deut. xvi. 18.); whose duty it was to exercise judicial authority in the neighbouring villages; but weighty causes and appeals were carried before the supreme judge or ruler of the commonwealth. (Deut. xvii. 8, 9.) According to Josephus, these inferior judges were seven in number, men zealous in the exercise of virtue and righteousness. To each judge (that is, to each college of judges in every city) two officers were assigned out of the tribe of Levi.4 These judges existed in the time of that historian ; and, although the rabbinical writers are silent concerning them, yet their silence neither does nor can outweigh the evidence of an eye-witness and magistrate, who himself appointed such judges.

I. In the early ages of the world, the Gate of the City was the SEAT OF JUSTICE, where conveyances of titles and estates were made, complaints were heard and justice done, and all public business was transacted. Thus Abraham made the acquisition of the sepulchre in the presence of all those who entered in at the gate of the city of Hebron. (Gen. xxiii. 10. 18.) When Hamor and his son Shechem proposed to make an alliance with Jacob and his sons, they spoke of it to the people at the gate of the city. (Gen. xxxiv. 24.) In later times Boaz, having declared his intention of marrying Ruth, at the gate of Bethlehem caused her kinsman to resign his pretensions, and give him the proper conveyance to the estate. (Ruth iv. 1-10.) From the circumstance of the gates of cities being the seat of justice, the judges appear to have been termed the Elders of the Gate (Deut. xxii. 15. xxv. 7.); for, as all the Israelites were husbandmen, who went out in the morning to work, and did not return until night, the city gate was the place of greatest resort. By this ancient practice, the judges were compelled, by a dread of public displeasure, to be most strictly impartial, and most carefully to investigate the merits of the causes which were brought before them. The same practice obtained after the captivity. (Zech. viii. 16.) The Ottoman court, it is well known, derived its appellation of the Porte, from the distribution of justice and the despatch of public business at its gates. During the Arabian monarchy in Spain, the same practice obtained; and the magnificent gate of entrance to the Moorish palace of Alhamra at Grenada to this day retains the appellation of the Gate of Justice or of Judgment. To the practice of dispensing justice at the gates of cities, there are numerous allusions in the Sacred Volume. For instance, in Job v. 4. the children of the wicked are said to be crushed in the gate; that is, they lose their cause, and are condemned in the court of judgment. The Psalmist (cxxvii. 5.), speaking of those whom God has blessed with many children, says that they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate; that is, those who are thus blessed shall courageously plead their cause, and need not fear the want of justice when they meet their adversaries in the court of judicature. Compare Prov. xxii. 22. and xxxi. 23. Lament. v. 14. Amos v. 12., in all which passages the gate, and elders of the land or of the gate, respectively denote the seat of jus-tlement of the Jews in Canaan, that their judges rode on tice and the judges who presided there. And as the gates of a city constituted its strength, and as the happiness of a people depended much upon the wisdom and integrity of the judges who sat there, it may be that our Saviour alluded to this circumstance, when he said, The gates of hell shall not prevail against his church (Matt. xvi. 18.); that is, neither the strength nor policy of Satan or his instruments shall ever be able to overcome it.

The Priests and Levites, who, from their being devoted to the study of the law, were, consequently, best skilled in its various precepts, and old men, who were eminent for their age and virtue, administered justice to the people in consequence of their age, the name of elders became attached to them. Many instances of this kind occur in the New Testament; they were also called rulers, aportes. (Luke xii. 58. where ruler is synonymous with judge.) The law of Moses contained the most express prohibitions of bribery (Exod. xxii. 8.) and partiality; enjoining them to administer justice without respect of persons, and reminding them, that a judge sits in the seat of God, and, consequently, that no man ought to have any pre-eminence in his sight, neither ought he to be afraid of any man in declaring the law. (Exod. xxiii. 3. 6, 7. Lev. xix. 15. Deut. i. 17. xvi. 18, 19.), The prophet Amos (viii. 6.) reproaches the corrupt judges of his time, with taking not only silver, but even so trifling an article of dress as a pair of (wooden) sandals, as a bribe, to condemn the innocent poor who could not afford to make them a present of equal value. Turkish officers and their wives in Asia, to this day, go richly clothed in costly silks given them by those who have causes depending before them. It is probable, at least in the early ages after the set

white asses, by way of distinction (Judges v. 10.), as the Mollahs or men of the law do to this day in Persia, and the heads of families returning from their pilgrimage to Mecca.

III. From these inferior tribunals, appeals lay to a higher court, in cases of importance. (Deut. xvii. 8-12.) In Jeru salem, it is not improbable that there were superior courts, in which David's sons presided. Psalm cxxii. 5. seems to allude to them: though we do not find that a supreme tri

of Jehoshaphat. (2 Chron. xix. 8-11.) It was composed of

Macknight on James ii. 2.

In the time of Jesus Christ the Jews held courts of judica-bunal was established at Jerusalem earlier than in the reign ture in their synagogues, where they punished offenders by Scourging. (Matt. x. 17. Acts xxii. 19. xxvi. 11.) After their example, Dr. Macknight thinks it probable, that the first Christians held courts for determining civil causes, in the places where they assembled for public worship, called your synagogue in the epistle of James. (ii. 2. Gr.) It is evident, he adds, that the apostle speaks not of their assembly, but of the place where their assembly was held, from his mentioning the litigants as sitting in a more honourable

1 Besides the authorities incidentally cited in the course of this section, the following works have been consulted for it, throughout; viz. Schulzii Archæologia Hebraica, pp. 66-81.; Calinet, Dissertation sur la Police des Hebreux (Dissertations, tom. i. pp. 187-204.); Alber, Hermeneutica Vet. Test. pp. 234-238.; Pritii Introd. ad Nov. Test. pp. 575-594.: Brunings Antiq. Hebr. pp. 99-107.; Home's Hist. of the Jews, vol. ii. pp. 30-41; Jahn, Archæol. Biblica, §§ 243-218.; Ackermann, Archæol. Bibl. $$ 237

-243.

2 Murphy's Arabian Anti uities of Spain, plates xiv. xv. pp. 8, 9.

4 Josephus, Ant. Jud. lib. iv. c. 14. Schulzii Prolusio de variis Judæorum erroribus in Descriptione Templi ii. § xv. pp. 27-32.; prefixed to his edition of Reland's Treatise De Spoliis Templi Hierosolymitani Trajecti ad Josephus, De Bell. Jud. lib. ii. c. 20. § 5.

Rhenum, 1775. 8vo.

Ernesti Institutio Interpretis Novi Testamenti, part iii. c. 10. § 73. p. 356.
Morier's Second Journey, p. 136.

Harmer's Observations, vol. ii. p. 317.

"We met, one day, a procession, consisting of a family returning from the pilgrimage to Mecca. Drums and pipes announced the joyft [vent. A white-bearded old man, riding on a white ass, led the way with patriarchal grace; and the men who met him, or accompanied him, were continually throwing their arins about his neck, and almost dismounting him with their salutations. He was followed by his three wives, each riding on a high camel; their female acquaintances running on each side, while they occasionally stooped down to salute them. The women continually uttered a remarkably shrill whistle. It was impossible, viewing the old man who led the way, not to remember the expression in Judges v. 10" Jowett's Christian Researches, p. 163.

priests and heads of families, and had two presidents,-one | Jews in our Saviour's time used to denote the place of the in the person of the high-priest, and another who sat in the damned. name of the king. The judicial establishment was reorga- Where there were not one hundred and twenty inhabitants nized after the captivity, and two classes of judges, inferior in a town or village, according to the Talmudist, there was and superior, were appointed. (Ezra vii. 25.) But the more a tribunal of three judges: and to this tribunal some writers difficult cases and appeals were brought, either before the have erroneously imagined that Joseph of Arimathea beruler of the state, or before the high-priest; until, in the age longed, rather than to the great Sanhedrin. But both the of the Maccabees, a supreme judicial tribunal was instituted, writers of the New Testament and Josephus are silent con which is first mentioned under Hyrcanus II.' cerning the existence of such a tribunal. Jahn is of opinion This tribunal (which must not be confounded with the that this court was merely a session of three arbitrators, seventy-two counsellors, who were appointed to assist Moses which the Roman laws permitted to the Jews in civil causes : in the civil administration of the government, but who never as the Talmudists themselves state that one judge was chosen fulfilled the office of judges) is by the Talmudists denominated by the accuser, another by the party accused, and a third by SANHEDRIN, and is the great Council so often mentioned in both parties. It appears, however, that only petty affairs were the New Testament. It was most probably instituted in the cognizable by this tribunal. The reference to arbitrators, time of the Maccabees, and was composed of seventy or se- recommended to Christians by St. Paul in 1 Cor. vi. 1—5., venty-two members, under the chief presidency of the high- has been supposed to be derived from this tribunal. priest, under whom were two vice-presidents; the first of It is essential to the ends of justice, that the proceedings whom, called the Father of the Council, sat on the right, as the of the courts should be committed to writing, and preserved second vice-president, who was called Chakam, or the Wise in archives or registries: Josephus informs us that there was Man, did on the left hand of the president. The other asses- such a repository at Jerusalem, which was burnt by the Rosors, or members of this council, comprised three descriptions mans, and which was furnished with scribes or notaries, for of persons, viz. 1. The Apxis, or Chief Priests, who were recording the proceedings. From this place, probably, St. partly such priests as had executed the pontificate, and partly | Luke derived his account of the proceedings against the the princes or chiefs of the twenty-four courses or classes of protomartyr Stephen, related in Acts vi. and vii. These tribupriests, who enjoyed this honourable title:-2. The Пpenals also had inferior ministers or officers (vrager, Matt. v. Tea, or Elders, perhaps the princes of tribes or heads of fa- 25.), who probably corresponded with our apparitors or mes milies; and, 3. The гpμμтs, Scribes, or men learned in sengers; and others whose office it was to carry the decrees the law. It does not appear that all the elders and scribes into execution, viz. 1. The рxxтps, or exactors, whose busiwere members of this tribunal: most probably those only ness it was to levy the fines imposed by the court; and, were assessors, who were either elected to the office, or no- 2. The Boavisa, or tormentors, those whose office it was to minated to it by royal authority. They are reported to have examine by torture: as this charge was devolved on gaolers, sat in a semi-circular form; and to this manner of their sitting in the time of Christ, the word "Braviss came to signify a in judgment Jesus Christ is supposed to refer in Matt. xix. gaoler.6 23., and St. Paul in 1 Cor. vi. 2.

The Sanhedrin held its daily sittings early in the morning (according to the Talmudists) in the Temple; but they are contradicted by Josephus, who speaks of a council-house in the immediate vicinity of the Temple, where this council was in all probability convened; though in extraordinary emergencies it was assembled in the high-priest's house, as was the case in the mock trial of Jesus Christ. The authority of this tribunal was very extensive. It decided all causes, which were brought before it, by appeal from inferior courts; and also took cognizance of the general affairs of the nation. Before Judæa was subject to the Roman power, the Sanhedrin had the right of judging in capital cases, but not afterwards; the stoning of Stephen being (as we have already observed) a tumultuary act, and not in consequence of sentence pronounced by this council.3

66

Besides the Sanhedrin, the Talmudical writers assert that there were other smaller councils, each consisting of twentythree persons, who heard and determined petty causes: two of these were at Jerusalem, and one in every city containing one hundred and twenty inhabitants. Josephus is silent concerning these tribunals, but they certainly appear to have existed in the time of Jesus Christ; who, by images taken from these two courts, in a very striking manner represents the different degrees of future punishments, to which the impenitently wicked will be doomed according to the respective heinousness of their crimes. But I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause, shall be in danger of the JUDGMENT; and whosever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the cOUNCIL; but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of HELL FIRE. (Matt. v. 22.) That is, whosoever shall indulge causeless and unprovoked resentment against his Christian brother, shall be punished with a severity similar to that which is inflicted by the court of judgment. He, who shall suffer his passions to transport him to greater extravagances, so as to make his brother the object of derision and contempt, shall be exposed to a still severer punishment, corresponding to that which the council imposes. But he who shall load his fellow-Christian with odíous appellations and abusive language, shall incur the severest degree of all punishments,-equal to that of being burnt alive in the valley of Hinnom :"-which, having formerly been the scene of those horrid sacrifices of children to Moloch by causing them to pass through the fire, the

1 Josephus, Ant. Jud. lib. xiv. c. 9. § 3.

2 De Bell. Jud. lib. v. c. 4. § 2. lib. vi. c. 6. § 3.

Dr. Lightfoot has given a list of sixteen presidents who directed the sanhedrin from the captivity till its dissolution. (Prospect of the Temple, ch. xxii. § 1. Works, vol. ix. pp. 342-346. 8vo. edit.)

Harwood's Introduction to the New Test. vol. ii. pp. 188, 189.

IV. It appears from Jer. xxi. 12., that causes were heard, and judgment was executed in the morning. According to the Talmud, capital causes were prohibited from being heard in the night, as also were the institution of an examination, the pronouncing of sentence, and the carrying of it into execution, on one and the same day; and it was enjoined that at least the execution of a sentence should be deferred until the following day. How flagrantly this injunction was disregarded in the case of Jesus Christ, it is scarcely necessary to mention. According to the Talmud, also, no judgments could be executed on festival days; but this by no means agrees with the end and design of capital punishment expressed in Deut. xvii. 13. viz. That all the people might hear and fear. It is evident from Matt. xxvi. 5. that the chief priests and other leading men among the Jews were at first afraid to apprehend Jesus, lest there should be a tumult among the people: it is not improbable that they feared the Galilæans more than the populace of Jerusalem, because they were the countrymen of our Lord. Afterwards, however, when the traitor Judas presented himself to them, their fears vanished away.

In the early ages of the Jewish history, judicial procedure must have been summary, as it still is in Asia. Of advocates, such as ours, there is no appearance in any part of the Old Testament. Every one pleaded his own cause; of this practice we have a memorable instance in 1 Kings iii. 16— 28. As causes were heard at the city gate, where the people assembled to hear news or to pass away their time, Michaelis thinks that men of experience and wisdom might be asked for their opinions in difficult cases, and might sometimes assist with their advice those who seemed embarrassed in their own cause, even when it was a good one. Probably this is alluded to in Job xxix. 7-17. and Isa. i. 17.9 From the Romans, the use of advocates, or patrons who pleaded the cause of another, might have passed to the Jews. In this view the word Пapatos, or advocate, is applied to Christ, our intercessor, who pleads the cause of sinners with his Father. (1 John ii. 1.) The form of proceeding appears to have been as follows:

1. Those who were summoned before courts of judicature, were said to be prepared as spion, because they were cited by posting up their names in some public place, and to these

Josephus, De Bell. Jud. lib. vi. c. 3. § 3.
Schleusner's and Parkhurst's Lexicon, in voce.
Sanhedrin, IV.

And also among the Marootzee, a nation inhabiting the interior of South Africa. Campbell's Travels in the interior of South Africa, vol. ii. p. 236. (London, 1822. 8vo.) From this, and other coincidences with Jewish observances, Mr. C. thinks it probable that the Marootzee are of Jewish or Arabian origin

Michaelis's Commentaries on the Laws of Moses, vol. iv. pp. 320. 323.

judgment was published or declared in writing. The Greek | pronounce the formula of the oath, either when it was a judiwriters applied the term papers, to those whom the Romans called proscriptos or proscribed, that is, whose names were posted up in writing in some public place, as persons doomed to die, with a reward offered to whoever would kill them. To this usage there is an allusion in the Epistle of Jude (verse 4.), where the persons who are said to be JERμμEVOL US TOUTO To agua, fore written to, or before described for, this condemnation, denote those who were long before described, in the examples of their wickedness contained in the writings of Moses and the prophets, such as the angels that sinned, the antediluvians, the people of Sodom, &c. And in the condemnation of these sinners, God has shown what he will do to all others like them. In the sacred writings, all false teachers and impure practices have been most openly proscribed and condemned, and in the following verses of the same epistle the apostle distinctly specifies who these per

the chief captain of the Roman garrison at Jerusalem presented himself to them. (Acts xxii. 28-36.) When they found the apostle in the temple, prejudiced as they were against him in general, and at that time particularly irritated by the mistaken notion that he had polluted the holy place by the introduction of Greeks into it, they raised a tumult, and were on the point of inflicting summary vengeance on Saint Paul. As soon as the chief captain of the Roman soldiers, who resided in a castle adjoining the temple, heard the tumult, he hastened thither. They then ceased beating the apostle, and addressed themselves to him as the chief official person there, exclaiming, Away with him. Permission being at length given to Paul to explain the affair in their hearing, they became still more violently enraged; but not daring to do themselves justice, they demanded it nearly in the same manner as the Persian peasants now do, by loud vociferations, tearing off their clothes and throwing up dust into the air.1

V. As soon as sentence of condemnation was pronounced against a person, he was immediately dragged from the court to the place of execution. Thus our Lord was instantly hurried from the presence of Pilate to Calvary: a similar instance of prompt execution occurred in the case of Achan; and the same practice obtains to this day, both in Turkey and Persia. In those countries, when the enemies of a great man have sufficient influence to procure a warrant for his death, a capidgi or executioner is despatched with it to the victim, who quietly submits to his fate. Nearly the same method of executing criminals was used by the ancient Jewish princes. It is evidently alluded to in Prov. xvi. 14. Thus Benaiah was the capidgi (to use the modern Turkish term) who was sent by Solomon to put to death Adonijah, a prince of the blood royal (1 Kings ii. 25.), and also Joab the commander-in-chief of the army. (29-31.) John the Baptist was put to death in like manner. (Matt. xiv. 10.) | Previously, however, to executing the criminal, it was usual, among the ancient Persians, to cover his head, that he might not behold the face of the sovereign. Thus, the head of Philotas, who had conspired against Alexander the Great, was covered; and in conformity with this practice, the head of Haman was veiled or covered. (Esth. vii. 8.)

according to the Talmudical writers, the Jews always gave him some wine with incense in it, in order to stupify and intoxicate him. This custom is said to have originated in the precept recorded in Prov. xxxi. 6., which sufficiently explains the reason why wine, mingled with myrrh, was offered to Jesus Christ when on the cross. (Mark xv. 23.) In the latter ages of the Jewish polity, this medicated cup of wine was so generally given before execution, that the word cup is sometimes put in the Scriptures for death itself. Thus, Jesus Christ, in his last prayer in the garden of Gethsemane, said-If it be possible let this CUP pass from me. (Matt. xxvi 39. 42.

SECTION II.

OF THE ROMAN JUDICATURE, MANNER OF TRIAL, TREATMENT
OF PRISONERS, AND OTHER TRIBUNALS MENTIONED IN THE
NEW TESTAMENT.

I.

Judicial proceedings of the Romans.-II. Privileges and treatment of Roman citizens, when prisoners.—III. Appeals to the imperial tribunal.—IV. The Roman method of fettering and confining criminals.-V. The Roman tribunals.— VI. Other tribunals mentioned in the New Testament :1. The Areopagus at Athens.--2. The Assembly at Ephesus. WHEREVER the Romans extended their power, they also carried their laws; and though, as we have already seen, they allowed their conquered subjects to enjoy the free performance of their religious worship, as well as the holding of some inferior courts of judicature, yet in all cases of a capital nature the tribunal of the Roman prefect or president was the last resort. Without his permission, no person could be put to death, at least in Judæa. And as we find numerous allusions in the New Testament to the Roman judicature, manner of trial, treatment of prisoners, and infliction of capital punishinent, a brief account of these subjects so intimately connected with the political state of Judæa under the Romans, naturally claims a place in the present sketch.1

I. "The judicial proceedings of the Romans were conducted in a manner worthy the majesty, honour, and magnanimity of that people. Instances, indeed, occur of a most scandalous venality and corruption in Roman judges, and the story of Jugurtha and Verres will stand, a lasting monument of the power of gold to pervert justice and shelter the most atrocious villany. But, in general, in the Roman judicatures, both in the imperial city and in the provinces, justice was administered with impartiality; a fair and honourable trial was permitted; the allegations of the plaintiff and defendant were respectively heard; the merits of the cause weighed and scrutinized with cool unbiassed judgment; and an equitable sentence pronounced. The Roman law, in conformity to the first principal of nature and reason, ordained that no one should be condemned and punished without a previous public trial. This was one of the decrees of the twelve tables: No one shall be condemned before he is tried. Under the Roman government, both in Italy and in the provinces, this universally obtained. After the cause is heard, says Cicero, a man may be acquitted: but, his cause unheard, no one can be condemned. To this excellent custom among the Romans, which the law of nature prescribes, and all the principles of equity, honour, and humanity dictate, there are several allusions in Scripture. We find the holy apostles,

So zealous were the Jews for the observance of their law, that they were not ashamed themselves to be the executioners of it, and to punish criminals with their own hands. In stoning persons, the witnesses threw the first stones, agreeably to the enactment of Moses. (Deut. xvii. 7.) Thus, the witnesses against the protomartyr Stephen, after laying down their clothes at the feet of Saul, stoned him (Acts vii. 58, 59.); and to this custom our Saviour alludes, when he said to the Pharisees, who had brought to him a woman who had been taken in adultery,-He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. (John viii. 7.) As there were no public executioners in the more ancient periods of the Jewish history, it was not unusual for persons of distinguished rank themselves to put the sentence in execution upon offenders. Thus Samuel put Agag to death (1 Sam. xv. 33.); and in like manner Nebuchadnezzar ordered Arioch the commander-in-chief of his forces to destroy the wise men of Babylon, because they could not interpret his dream. (Dan. ii. 21.) Previously, however, to inflicting punishment, it was a custom of the Jews, that the witnesses should lay their hands on the criminal's head. This custom originated in an express precept of God, in the case of one who had blasphemed the name of Jehovah, who was ordered to be brought without the camp: when all, who had heard him, were appointed to lay their hands upon his head, and afterwards the congregation were to stone him. By this action they signified, that the condemned person suffered justly, protesting that, if he were innocent, they desired that his blood might fall on their own head. In allusion to this usage, when sentence was pronounced against Jesus Christ, the Jews ex-inserted in his Commentaire Litterale, tom. i. part ii. pp. 387-402., and in claimed,-His blood be upon us and our children. (Matt. xxvii. 25.) From the above-noticed precept of bringing the criminals without the camp, arose the custom of executing them without the city.

But in whatever manner the criminal was put to death, 1 Harmer's Observations, vol. iii. pp. 367–369.

Ibid. vol. ii. pp. 372-376. Captains Irby and Mangles have related a singular instance of similar rapidity of executing a condemned person. In this case "the sufferer had been appointed to the command of the hadj" (or pilgrims to Mecca), "and had set off from Constantinople. While he was on his return from Mecca, a Khat-sheriffe was despatched from the capital, ordering his head to be cut off, and sent immediately to Constanti nople. His sentence was carried into execution before he reached Damas Cus Travels in Egypt, &c. p. 257.

Quintus Curtius, lib. vi. c. 8. tom. ii. p. 34. edit. Bipont.
VOL. II.

H

The materials of this section are principally derived from Dr. Harwood's Introduction to the New Testament (a work now of rare occurrence), vol. ii. section xvi. the texts cited being carefully verified and corrected. The subjects of this and the following section are also discussed by Dr. Lardner, Credibility, part i. book i. c. 10. 559--11.; and especially by Calmet in his elaborate Dissertation sur les supplices dont il est parle dans l'Ecriture, his Dissertations, tom. i. p. 241. et seq. See also Merill's Notæ Philologica in passionem Christi, and Wyssenbach's Note Nouico-Philologica in pasLydius's Florum Sparsio ad Historiam Passionis Jesu Christi, 18mo. Dorsionem, in vol. iii. of Crenius's Fasciculus Opusculorum, pp. 583-691. and

drechti, 1672.

Interfici indemnatum quemcunque hominem, etiam xii Tabularum decreta vetuerant. Fragment. xii. Tab. tit. 27.

Causâ cognità multi possunt absolvi: incognità quidem condemnari nemo potest. In Verrem, lib. i. c. 25. "Producing the laws which ordain that no person shall suffer death without a legal trial." Dion. Halicarn. lib. iii. p. 153. Hudson. "He did not allow them to inflict death on any citizen uncondemned." Ibid. lib. vi. p. 370. lib. vii. p. 428. edit Hudson, Oxon. 1704. "They thought proper to call him to justice, as it is contrary to the Roman customs to condemn any one to death without a previous trial." Appian. Bell. Civil. lib. iii. p. 206. Tollii, 1670. "Did not you miserably murder Lentulus and his associates, without their being either judged or convicted?" Dion Cassius, lib. 46. p. 463. Reimar.

66

[PART II. CHAP. IIL who did not, like frantic enthusiasts and visionaries, court | Roman citizen. In consequence of this epistle Felix gave persecution, but embraced every legal method which the the apostle a kind and candid reception: when he read it, he usages and maxims of those times had established to avoid turned to him and said, When your accusers come hither it, and to extricate themselves from calamities and sufferings, before me, I will give your cause an impartial hearing. pleading this privilege, reminding the Romans of it when And accordingly when the high-priest Ananias and the Santhey were going to infringe it, and in a spirited manner up-hedrin went down to Cæsarea with one Tertullus an orator, braiding their persecutors with their violation of it. When whose eloquence they had hired to aggravate the apostle's Lysias, the Roman tribune, ordered Saint Paul to be con- crimes before the procurator, Felix, though a man of merceducted into the castle, and to be examined by scourging, that nary and profligate character, did not depart from the Roman he might learn what he had done that enraged the mob thus honour in this regard; and would not violate the usual proviolently against him, as the soldiers were fastening him cesses of judgment to gratify this body of men, though they with thongs to the pillars to inflict this upon him, Paul said were the most illustrious personages of the province he o the centurion who was appointed to attend and see this ex- governed, by condemning the apostle unheard, and yielding ecuted, Doth the Roman law authorize you to scourge a free- him, poor and friendless as he was, to their fury, merely man of Rome uncondemned, to punish him before a legal upon their impeachment. He allowed the apostle to offer sentence hath been passed upon him? (Acts xxii. 25.) The his vindication and exculpate himself from the charges they centurion hearing this went immediately to the tribune, bid- had alleged against him; and was so far satisfied with his ding him be cautious how he acted upon the present occa- apology as to give orders for him to be treated as a prisoner sion, for the prisoner was a Roman citizen! The tribune at large, and for all his friends to have free access to him; upon this information went to him, and said, Tell me the disappointing those who thirsted for his blood, and drawing truth, Are you a freeman of Rome? He answered in the af- down upon himself the relentless indignation of the Jews, firmative. It cost me an immense sum, said the tribune, to who, undoubtedly, from such a disappointment, would be purchase this privilege. But I was the son of a freeman,2 instigated to lay all his crimes and oppressions before the said the apostle. Immediately, therefore, those who were emperor. ordered to examine him by torture desisted; and the tribune The same strict honour, in observing the usual forms was extremely alarmed that he had bound a Roinan citizen. ¦ and processes of the Roman tribunal, appears in Festus the In reference to this also, when Paul and Silas were treated | successor of Felix. Upon his entrance into his province, with the last indignity at Philippi by the multitude abetted when the leading men among the Jews waited upon him to by the magistrates, were beaten with rods, thrown into the congratulate him upon his accession, and took that opportupublic gaol, and their feet fastened in the stocks, the next nity to inveigh with great bitterness and virulence against morning upon the magistrates sending their lictors to the the apostle, soliciting it as a favour (Acts xxv. 3.) that he prison with orders to the keeper for the two men whom they would send him to Jerusalem, designing, as it afterwards had the day before so shamefully and cruelly treated to be appeared, had he complied with their request, to have hired dismissed, Paul turned to the messengers and said, We are ruffians to murder him on the road, Festus told them, that Roman citizens. Your magistrates have ordered us to be it was his will that Paul should remain i custody at Cæsapublicly scourged without a legal trial. They have thrown rea; but that any persons whom they fixed upon might go us into a dungeon. And would they now have us steal down along with him, and produce at his tribunal what they away in a silent and clandestine manner? No! Let them had to allege against the prisoner. This was worthy the come in person and conduct us out themselves. The lictors Roman honour and spirit. How importunate and urgent the returned and reported this answer to the governors, who were priests and principal magistrates of Jerusalem, when Festus greatly alarmed and terrified when they understood they were was in this capital, were with him to pass sentence of death Roman citizens. Accordingly, they went in person to the upon the apostle, merely upon their impeachment, and upon gaol, addressed them with great civility, and begged them the atrocious crimes with which they loaded him, appears in the most respectful terms that they would quietly leave from what the procurator himself told king Agrippa and the town. (Acts xvi. 37.)3 Bernice upon a visit they paid him at Cæsarea, to congratulate him upon his new government. I have here, said he, a man whom my predecessor left in custody when he quitted this province. During a short visit I paid to Jerusalem, upon my arrival I was solicited by the priests and principal magistrates to pass sentence of death upon him. To these urgent entreaties I replied, that it was not customary for the Romans to gratify (xxv. 16.) any man with the death of another; that the laws of Rome enacted that he who is accused should have his accuser face to face; and have license to answer for himself concerning the crimes laid against him.'

"Here we cannot but remark the distinguished humanity and honour which St. Paul experienced from the tribune Lysais. His whole conduct towards the apostle was worthy a Roman. This most generous and worthy officer rescued him from the sanguinary fury of the mob, who had seized the apostle, shut the temple doors, and were in a tumultuous manner dragging him away instantly to shed his blood. Afterwards, also, when above forty Jews associated and mutually bound themselves by the most solemn adjurations, that they would neither eat nor drink till they had assassinated him; when the tribune was informed of this conspiracy, to secure the person of the apostle from the determined fury of the Jews, he immediately gave orders for seventy horsemen and two hundred spearmen to escort the prisoner to Cæsarea, where the procurator resided; writing a letter, in which he informed the president of the vindictive rage of the Jews against the prisoner, whom he had snatched from their violence, and whom he afterwards discovered to be a

1 Dion Cassius confirms what the tribune here asserts, that this honour was purchased at a very high price. "The freedom of Rome formerly,” says the historian, "could only be purchased for a large sum;" but he observes, "that in the reign of Claudius, when Messalina and his freedmen had the management of every thing, this honour became so cheap that any person might buy it for a little broken glass." Dion Cassius, lib. lx. p. Rennar.

955.

"But I was free born." Probably, St. Paul's family was honoured with the freedom of Rome for engaging in Cæsar's party, and distinguishing themselves in his cause during the civil wars. Appian informs us, that "He made the Laodiceans and Tarsensians free, and exempted them from taxes; and those of the Tarsensians who had been sold for slaves, he ordered by an edict to be released from servitude." Appian de Bell. Civil. p. 1077. Tollii. 1670.

3 It was deemed a great aggravation of any injury by the Roman law, that it was done in public before the people. The Philippian magistrates, therefore, conscious of the iniquity which they had committed, and of the punishment to which they were liable, might well be afraid: for Paul and Silas had their option, either to bring a civil action against them, or to indict them criminally for the injury which they had inflicted on the apostle and his companion. In either of which cases, had they been cast, they would be rendered infamous, and incapable of holding any magisterial office, and subjected to several other legal incapacities, besides the punishment they were to undergo at the discretion of the judge, which in so atrocious an jury would not have been small. Biscoe on the Acts, vol. i. pp. 352–354. • Acts xxiii. 27. "I have since learned that he is a Roman citizen."

II. "It appears from numberless passages in the classics that a Roman citizen could not legally be scourged. This was deemed to the last degree dishonourable, the most daring indignity and insult upon the Roman name. A Roman citizen, judges! exclaims Cicero in his oration against Verres, was publicly beaten with rods in the forum of Messina : during this public dishonour, no groan, no other expression of the unhappy wretch was heard amidst the crueltics he suffered, and the sound of the strokes that were inflicted, but this, I am a Roman citizen! By this declaration that he was a Roman citizen, he fondly imagined that he should put an end to the ignominy and cruel usage to which he was now subjected."The orator afterwards breaks forth into this

Acts xxiii. 35. Literally, "Hear it through; give the whole of it an attentive examination." Similar expressions occur in Polybius, lib. i. pp. 39. 170. 187 lib iv. p. 328. edit. Hanov. 1619. See also Dion. Halicarn. lib. x. p. 304. Felix per omne sævitium ac libidinem, jus regim servili ingenio exercuit. Tacitus Hist. lib. v. p. 397. edit. Dublin. Felix cuncta maleficia impune ratus. Anual. xii 54. He hoped also that money, &c. Acts xxiv. 26. "Senators," saith Piso, "the law ordains that he who is accused should hear his accusation, and after having offered his defence, to wait the sentence of the judges." Appian, Bell. Civit. lib. iii. p. 911. Tollii, Amst. 1670. "He said, that what he now attempted to do was the last tyranny and des potism, that the same person should be both accuser and judge, and should arbitrarily dictate the degree of punishment." Dion. Halicarn. lib. vii. p. 428. Hudson. • Facinus est vinciri civem Romanum: scelus verberari. In Verrem, lib. v. 170.

• Cædebatur virgis in medio foro Messinæ civis Romanus, judices: cum interea nullus gemitus, nulla vox alia istius miseri, inter dolorem crepituinque plagarum audiebatur, nisi hæc, Civis Romanus sum. Hac se coinmemoratione civitatis omnia verbera depulsurum cruciatumque a corpore dejecturum arbitrabatur. Cicero in Verrem, lib. v. 162.