[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 was extremely alarmed that he had bound a Roman citizen, In reference to this also, when Paul and Silas were treated with the last indignity at Philippi by the multitude abetted by the magistrates, were beaten with rods, thrown into the public gaol, and their feet fastened in the stocks, the next morning upon the magistrates sending their lictors to the prison with orders to the keeper for the two men whom they had the day before so shamefully and cruelly treated to be dismissed, Paul turned to the messengers and said, We are Roman citizens. Your magistrates have ordered us to be publicly scourged without a legal trial. They have thrown us into a dungeon. And would they now have us steal away in a silent and clandestine manner? No! Let them come in person and conduct us out themselves. The lictors returned and reported this answer to the governors, who were greatly alarmed and terrified when they understood they were Roman citizens. Accordingly, they went in person to the gaol, addressed them with great civility, and begged them in the most respectful terms that they would quietly leave the town. (Acts xvi. 37.)3

The same strict honour, in observing the usual forms and processes of the Roman tribunal, appears in Festus the successor of Felix. Upon his entrance into his province, when the leading men among the Jews waited upon him to congratulate him upon his accession, and took that opportunity to inveigh with great bitterness and virulence against the apostle, soliciting it as a favour (Acts xxv. 3.) that he would send him to Jerusalem, designing, as it afterwards appeared, had he complied with their request, to have hired ruffians to murder him on the road, Festus told them, that it was his will that Paul should remain i custody at Cæsarea; but that any persons whom they fixed upon might go down along with him, and produce at his tribunal what they had to allege against the prisoner. This was worthy the Roman honour and spirit. How importunate and urgent the priests and principal magistrates of Jerusalem, when Festus was in this capital, were with him to pass sentence of death upon the apostle, merely upon their impeachment, and upon the atrocious crimes with which they loaded him, appears from what the procurator himself told king Agrippa and Bernice upon a visit they paid him at Cæsarea, to congratu late 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.7

"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, II. "It appears from numberless passages in the classics to secure the person of the apostle from the determined fury that a Roman citizen could not legally be scourged. This of the Jews, he immediately gave orders for seventy horse- was deemed to the last degree dishonourable, the most daring men and two hundred spearmen to escort the prisoner to indignity and insult upon the Roman name. 'A Roman citiCæsarea, where the procurator resided; writing a letter, in zen, judges!' exclaims Cicero in his oration against Verres, which he informed the president of the vindictive rage ofwas publicly beaten with rods in the forum of Messina: the Jews against the prisoner, whom he had snatched from during this public dishonour, no groan, no other expression their violence, and whom he afterwards discovered to be a of the unhappy wretch was heard amidst the cruelties 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

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. 955. Reimar.

"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 inforins 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. Tolli. 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 bad 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 njury 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."

Acts xxiii. 35. Literally, "Hear it through; give the whole of it an aftentive 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. 301. 6 Felix per omne sævitium ac libidinem, jus regium 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. Civil. lib. iii. p. 911. Tollii, Amst. 1670. "He said, that what he now attempted to do was the last tyranny and despotisin, 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.

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

pathetic prosopopœia: O transporting name of liberty! O the distinguished privilege of Roman freedom! O Porcian and Sempronian laws! Are things at last come to this wretched state, that a Roman citizen, in a Roman province, in the most public and open manner, should be beaten with ods!' The historian Appian, after relating how Marcellus, to express his scorn and contempt of Cæsar, seized a person of some distinction, to whom Cæsar had given his freedom, and beat him with rods, bidding him go and show Cæsar the marks of the scourges he had received, observes, that this was an indignity which is never inflicted upon a Roman citizen for any enormity whatever.2 Agreeably to this custom, which also obtained at Athens, in the Adelphi of Terence, one of the persons of the drama says to another, If you continue to be troublesome and impertinent, you shall be instantly seized and dragged within, and there you shall be torn and mangled with scourges within an inch of your life. What! a freeman scourged, replies Sannio. To this privilege of Roman citizens, whose freedom exempted them from this indignity and dishonour, there are several references in Scripture. St. Paul pleads this immunity. He said to the centurion, as they were fastening him to the pillar with thongs to inflict upon him this punishment, Is it lawful for you to scourge a Roman ? So also at Philippi he told the messen-I appeal to the emperor. Festus, after deliberating with the gers of the magistrates, They have beaten us openly uncondemned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison, and now do they thrust us out privately; no, verily, but let them come themselves and fetch us out. And the sergeants told these words to the magistrates, and they feared when they heard that they were Romans, and were conscious they had used them with a contumely and dishonour which subjected them to the just displeasure of the Roman senate.

6

another singular privilege which a freeman of Rome enjoyed. The sacred historian relates, that after Festus had stayed about ten days in the metropolis, he went down to Cæsarea, and the next day after his arrival he summoned a court, ascended the bench, and ordered Paul to be brought before him. Here, as he stood at the bar, his prosecutors from Jerusalem with great virulence charged him with many heinous and atrocious crimes, none of which, upon strict examination, they were able to prove against him. For in his apology he publicly declared, in the most solemn terms, that they could not convict him of any one instance of a criminal behaviour, either to the law, the temple, or to the Roman emperor. Festus then, being (Acts xxv. 9.) desirous to ingratiate himself with the Jews, asked him if he was willing his cause should be tried at Jerusalem. To this proposal Paul replied, I am now before Cæsar's tribunal, where my cause ought to be impartially canvassed and decided. You yourself' are conscious that I have been guilty of nothing criminal against my countrymen. If I have injured them, if I have perpetrated any capital crime, I submit without reluctance to capital punishment. But if all the charges they have now brought against me are proved to be absolutely false and groundless, no person can condemn me to death merely to gratify them. Roman council, turned and said to him, Have you appealed to the emperor? You shall then go and be judged by the emperor. From the above-mentioned particulars, which are corroborated by several other similar incidents in the Roman history, it appears that a Roman citizen could by appeal remove his cause out of the provinces to Rome. It was,' says Mr. Melmoth, one of the privileges of a Roman citizen, secured by the Sempronian law, that he could not be capitally "Neither was it lawful for a Roman citizen to be bound, convicted but by the suffrage of the people, which seems to be examined by the question, or to be the subject of any to have been still so far in force as to make it necessary ingenious and cruel arts of tormenting to extort a confession to send the person here mentioned to Rome." We are infrom him. These punishments were deemed servile; torture formed by Dionysius of Halicarnassus that the ever-memowas not exercised but upon slaves; freemen were privileged rable Poplicola enacted this law, that if any Roman governor from this inhumanity and ignominy. It is a flagrant enormity, showed a disposition to condemn any one to death, to scourge says Cicero, for a Roman citizen to be bound: not meaning him, or despoil him of his property, that any private person by that, that it was unlawful for a Roman to be fettered and should have liberty to appeal froin his jurisdiction to the imprisoned; but it was in the highest degree unjustifiable and judgment of the people, that in the mean time he should reillegal for a freeman of Rome to be bound in order to be tor-ceive no personal harm from the magistracy till his cause tured for the discovery of his crimes. Dion Cassius, parti- was finally decided by the people.10 This law, which was cularizing the miseries of Claudius's government, observes, instituted at the first establishment of the commonwealth, that Messalina and Narcissus, and the rest of his freemen, continued in force under the emperors. If a freeman of seized the occasion that now offered to perpetrate the last Rome, in any of the provinces, deemed himself and his cause enormities. Among other excesses they employed slaves to be treated by the president with dishonour and injustice, and freedmen to be informers against their masters. They he could by appeal remove it to Rome to the determination put to the torture several persons of the first distinction, not of the emperor. Suetonius informs us that Augustus delemerely foreigners, but citizens; not only of the common peo-gated a number of consular persons at Rome to receive the ple, but some even of the Roman knights and senators: appeals of people in the provinces, and that he appointed one though Claudius, when he first entered upon his government, had bound himself under a solemn oath that he would never apply the torture to any Roman citizen. These two passages from Cicero and Dion illustrate what St. Luke relates concerning Lysias the tribune. This officer, not knowing the dignity of his prisoner, had, in violation of this privilege of Roman citizens, given orders for the apostle to be bound, and examined by scourging. (Acts xxii. 24, 25.) When he was afterwards informed by his centurion that St. Paul was a freeman of Rome, the sacred historian observes, that upon receiving this intelligence, the chief captain was afraid, after he knew that he was a Roman, and because he had bound him. (xxii. 29.)

III. "We find that St. Paul, when he discovered that Festus his judge was disposed to gratify the Jews, appealed from a provincial court to the imperial tribunal; transferred his cause, by appeal, from the jurisdiction of the Roman procurator to the decision of the emperor. This appears to be

10 nomen dulce liberatis! O jus eximium nostræ civitatis! Olex Por cia, legesque Semproniæ! Huccine tandem omnia recederunt, ut civis Rocanus in provincia populi Romani, delegatis in foro virgis cæderetur.

Ibid. 163.

2

* Appian. Bell. Civil. lib. ii. p. 731. Tollii.

• Nam si molestus pergis esse, jam intro abripiere, atque ibi
Usque ad necem operiere loris. S. loris liber.
Adelphi, act ii. scenal. ver. 28.

• Acts xxii. 25. The consul Marcellus scourged with rods one of the magistrates of that place who came to Rome, declaring he inflicted this as a publie token that he was no Roman citizen. Plutarch, in Cæsar. p. 1324. edit Gr. Stephen.

• Facinus est vinciri civem Romanum. Cicero in Verr. lib. v. 170. Q Gallium prætorem, servilem in modum torsit.

gusti, cap. 27. p. 192. Variorum Edit.

1 See the last note but one.

• Dion Cassius, lib. lx. p. 953. Reimar.

person to superintend the affairs of each province. A passage in Pliny's epistle confirms this right and privilege which Roman freemen enjoyed of appealing from provincial courts to Rome, and, in consequence of such an appeal, being removed, as St. Paul was, to the capital, to take their trial in the supreme court of judicature. In that celebrated epistle to Trajan, who desired to be informed concerning the principles and conduct of the Christians, he thus writes: The method I have observed towards those who have been brought before me as Christians is this-I interrogated them whether they were Christians: if they confessed, I repeated the question twice again, adding threats at the same time, when, if they still persevered, I ordered them to be immediately punished; for I was persuaded, whatever the nature of their opinions might be, a contumacious and inflexible obstinacy certainly deserved correction. There were others, also, brought before me, possessed with the same infatuation, but, being citizens of Rome, I directed them to be carried thither.'12

IV. "The Roman method of fettering and confining criminals was singular. One end of a chain, that was of commodious length, was fixed about the right arm of the prisoner, and the other end was fastened to the left arm of a soldier. Thus a soldier was coupled to the prisoner, and every where

• Mr. Melmoth's note on the 97th letter in the 10th book of Pliny's Epis tles, vol. ii. p. 672. 3d edit.

10 Dion. Halicarn. lib. v. p. 281. edit. Oxon. 1704. See also p. 334. ejusdem

edit.

11 Appellationes quotannis urbanorum quidem litigatorum prætori delega Sueton. in vita Au- vit; ac provincialium consularibus viris, quos singulos cujusque provincia negotiis reposuisset. Sueton. vit. August. cap. 33. p. 208. edit. var. Lug. Bat.

1662.

13 Plinii Epistolæ, lib. x. epist. 97. pp. 722, 723. ed. var. 1669,

66

attended and guarded him. This manner of confinement is was first introduced among the Romans by Sylla. Their frequently mentioned, and there are many beautiful allusions great men were so fond of this magnificence, and thought it to it in the Roman writers. Thus was St. Paul confined. so essential to the elegance and splendour of life, that they Fettered in this manner, he delivered his apology before appear to have carried with them these splendid materials to Festus, king Agrippa, and Bernice. And it was this circum- form and compose these elaborate floors, for their tents, for stance that occasioned one of the most pathetic and affecting their houses, and for their tribunals, wherever they removed strokes of true oratory that ever was displayed either in the-from a depraved and most wretchedly vitiated taste, at last Grecian or Roman senate. Would to God that not only THOU, deeming them a necessary and indispensable furniture, not but also ALL that hear me this day, were both almost and alto- merely a vain and proud display of grandeur and greatness. gether such as I am, except these bonds! What a prodigious With this variegated pavement, composed of pieces of mareffect must this striking conclusion, and the sight of the irons ble or stone thus disposed and combined, the evangelist held up to enforce it, make upon the minds of the audience! informs us, that the floor of Pilate's tribunal was ornamented. During the two years that St. Paul was a prisoner at large, and (John xix. 13.) Such an embellishment of a tribunal was Lived at Rome in his own hired house, he was subjected to this only a proud ostentatious display to the world of Italian confinement. Paul was suffered to dwell with a soldier that greatness and magnificence, calculated less for real use than kept him. The circumstance of publicly wearing his chain, to strike the beholders with an idea of the boundless prodiand being thus coupled to a soldier, was very disgraceful and gality and extravagance of the Romans. dishonourable, and the ignominy of it would naturally occa- Having mentioned Pilate the Roman procurator, we cansion the desertion of former friends and acquaintance. Hence not close this section without remarking the efforts he rethe apostle immortalizes the name of Onesiphorus, and fer- peatedly made, when he sat in judgment upon Jesus, to save vently intercedes with God to bless his family, and to re-him from the determined fury of the Jews. Five successive member him in the day of future recompense, for a rare attempts are enumerated by commentators and critics. He instance of distinguished fidelity and affection to him when had the fullest conviction of his innocence-that it was merely all had turned away from him and forsaken him. The Lord through malice, and a virulence which nothing could pla give mercy to the house of Onesiphorus, for he oft refreshed me, cate, that they demanded his execution. Yet though the and was not ASHAMED of my CHAIN, but immediately upon his governor for a long time resisted all their united clamour and arrival in Rome he sought me out very diligently till he found importunity, and, conscious that he had done nothing worthy me! The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the of death, steadily refused to pronounce the sentence of conLord in that day. (2 Tim. i. 16, 17, 18.) demnation upon him; yet one argument, which in a menacing "Sometimes the prisoner was fastened to two soldiers, manner they addressed to him, at last totally shook his firmone on each side, wearing a chain both on his right and left ness, and induced him to yield to their sanguinary purpose. hand. St. Paul at first was thus confined. When the tri- The Jews, after aggravating his guilt, and employing every bune received him from the hands of the Jews, he com- expedient in vain to influence the president to inflict capital manded him to be bound with two chains. (Acts xxi. 33.) | punishment upon him, at last cried out: If thou let this man In this manner was Peter fettered and confined by Herod go, thou art not Cæsar's friend; whosoever maketh himself a Agrippa. The same night Peter was sleeping between two sol-king, speaketh against Cæsar. Upon hearing this, all his diers, bound with TWO CHAINS. (Acts xii. 6.) former firmness instantly vanished; he could stem the torrent of popular fury no longer to this he yielded, and immediately ordered his execution. Then delivered he him, therefore, to them to be crucified. This conduct of Pilate arose from his perfect knowledge of the character and temper of his master Tiberius, who was a gloomy old tyrant, day and night incessantly haunted with the fiends of jealousy and suspicion-who would never forgive any innovations in his government, but punished the authors and abettors of them with inexorable death. Pilate, therefore, hearing the Jews reiterating this with menaces, that if he let him go he was not Cæsar's friend-knowing the jealousy and cruelty of Tiberius, and fearing that the disappointed rage of the Jews would instigate them to accuse him to the old tyrant, as abetting and suffering a person to escape with impunity, who had assumed the regal title and character in one of his provinces, was alarmed for his own safety; and rather than draw down upon his devoted head the resentment of the sovereign, who would never forgive or forget an injury, real or imaginary, contrary to his own judgment and clear persuasion of the innocence of Jesus, sentenced him to be crucified."

"It further appears, that if the soldiers, who were thus appointed to guard criminals, and to whom they were chained, suffered the prisoner to escape, they were punished with death. Thus, when Peter was delivered out of prison by a miracle, the next morning we read there was no small confusion among the soldiers who were appointed his guards, and to whom he had been chained, what was become of Peter.

"Whence it appears that his deliverance had been effected, and his shackles had been miraculously unloosed, without their knowledge, when they were sunk in repose. Upon which Herod, after making a fruitless search for him, ordered all those who had been entrusted with the custody of Peter to be executed. (Acts xii. 19.) In like manner also keepers of prisons were punished with death, if the confined made their escape. This is evident from what is related concerning the imprisonment of Paul and Silas at Philippi. These, after their bodies were mangled with scourges, were precipitated into the public dungeon, and their feet were made fast in the stocks. At midnight these good men prayed and sang praises to God in these circumstances; when suddenly a dreadful earthquake shook the whole prison to its foundation, all the doors in an instant flew open, and the shackles of all the prisoners dropped to the ground. This violent concussion awakening the keeper, when he saw the doors of the prison wide open, he drew his sword, and was going to plunge it in his bosom, concluding that all the prisoners had escaped. In that crisis Paul called to him with a loud voice, entreating him not to lay violent hands upon himself, assuring him all the prisoners were safe.

V. "The Roman tribunal, if we may judge of it from what is related concerning Pilate's, was erected on a raised stage, the floor of which was embellished with a tesselated pavement. This consisted of little square pieces of marble, or of stones of various colours, which were disposed and arranged with great art and elegance, to form a chequered and pleasing appearance. Pliny informs us that this refinement 1 Quemadmodum eadem catena et custodiam et militem copulat, sic ista quæ tam dissimilia sunt, pariter incedunt. Seneca Epist. 5. tom. ii. p. 13. Gronovii, 1672. So also Manilius.

Vinctorum dominus, sociusque in parte catena,

Interdum pænis innoxia corpora servat.-Lib. V. v. 628, 629.

In like manner the brave but unfortunate Eumenes addressed a very pathetic speech to his army, with his fetters on. Plutarch, Eumenes. Jus tin, lib. xiv. cap. 3.

a Prolatam, sicut erat catenatus, manum ostendit. Justin, lib. xiv. cap.3. p. 395. Gronovii.

• Opus tessellatum ex parvulis coloris varii lapillis quadratis constabat, quibus solum pavimenti încrustabatur. Varro de re rustica, lib. iii. 1.

VI. As the Romans allowed the inhabitants of conquered countries to retain their local tribunals, we find incidental mention made in the New Testament of provincial courts of justice. Two of these are of sufficient importance to claim a distinct notice in this place; viz. 1. The Areopagus, at Athens; and, 2. The Assembly, at Ephesus.

1. The tribunal of the AREOPAGUS is said to have been instituted at Athens, by Cecrops the founder of that city, and was celebrated for the strict equity of its decisions. Among the various causes of which it took cognizance, were matters of religion, the consecration of new gods, erection of temples and altars, and the introduction of new ceremonies into divine worship. On this account St. Paul was brought before the tribunal of Areopagus as a setter forth of strange gods, because he preached unto the Athenians, Jesus and Avatars, or the Resurrection. (Acts xvii. 18.) Its sittings were held on the Apes Hayes, or Hill of Mars (whence its name was derived), which is situated in the midst of the city of Athens, opposite to the Acropolis or citadel, and is an insulated precipitous rock, broken towards the south, and on the north side sloping gently down to the temple of Thesus.

Lithostrota acceptavere sub Sylla. Plinii Hist. Nat. lib. xxxvi. p. 60. In expeditionibus tessella at sectilia pavimenta circumtulisse. Suetonius vita J. Cæsaris. cap. 46. p. 74. edit. variorum Lug. Bat. 1662. Vid. etiam not. Salmasii in loc.

See Suetonius, Tacitus, Dion Cassius.

Philo makes the very same remark concerning Pilate, p. 390. edit. Mangey.

2. God being both the sovereign and the legislator of the Israelites, BLASPHEMY (that is, the speaking injuriously of his name, h's attributes, his government, and his revelation) was not only a crime against Him, but also against the state; It was, therefore, punished capitally by stoning. (Lev. xxiv. 10-14.)

3. It appears from Deut. xviii. 20-22. that a FALSE PROPHET was punished capitally, being stoned to death; and there were two cases in which a person was held as convicted of the crime, and consequently liable to its punishment, viz. (1.) If he had prophesied any thing in the name of any other god,-whether it took place or not, he was at all events considered as a false prophet, and, as such, stoned to death. (Deut. xiii. 2—6.)-(2.) If a prophet spoke in the name of the true God, he was tolerated, so long as he remained unconvicted of imposture, even though he threatened calamity or destruction to the state, and he could not be punished but when the event which he had predicted did not come to pass, he was regarded as an audacious impostor, and, as such, was stoned. (Deut. xviii. 21, 22.)

4. DIVINATION is the conjecturing of future events from things which are supposed to presage them. The eastern people were always fond of divination, magic, the curious arts of interpreting dreams, and of obtaining a knowledge of future events. When Moses gave the law which bears his name to the Israelites, this disposition had long been common in Egypt and the neighbouring countries. Now, all these vain arts in order to pry into futurity, and all divination whatever, unless God was consulted by prophets, or by Urim and Thummim (the sacred lot kept by the high-priest), were expressly prohibited by the statutes of Lev. xix. 26. 31. xx. 6. 23. 27. and Deut. xviii. 9-12. In the case of a person transgressing these laws, by consulting a diviner, God reserved to himself the infliction of his punishment; the transgressor not being amenable to the secular magistrate. (Lev. xx. 6.) The diviner himself was to be stoned. (Lev. xx. 27.)

5. PERJURY is, by the Mosaic law, most peremptorily prohibited as a most heinous sin against God; to whom the punishment of it is left, and who in Exod. xx. 7. expressly promises that he will inflict it, without ordaining the infliction of any punishment by the temporal magistrate; except only in the case of a man falsely charging another with a crime, in which case the false witness was liable to the same punishment which would have been inflicted on the accused party if he had been found to have been really guilty (as is shown in p. 64. infra); not indeed as the punishment of perjury against God, but of false witness.

II. CRIMES AGAINST PARENTS and MAGISTRATES Constitute an important article of the criminal law of the Hebrews. 1. In the form of government among that people, we recognise much of the patriarchal spirit; in consequence of which fathers enjoyed great rights over their families. The CURSING OF PARENTS, that is, not only the imprecation of evil on them, but probably also all rude and reproachful language towards them, was punished with death (Exod. xxi. 17. Lev. xx. 9.); as likewise was the striking of them. (Exod. xxi. 15.) An example of the crime of cursing of a parent, which is fully in point, is given by Jesus Christ in Matt. xv. 4-6. or Mark vii. 9-12.; "where he upbraids the Pharisees with their giving, from their deference to human traditions and doctrines, such an exposition of the divine law, as converted an action, which, by the law of Moses, would have been punished with death, into a vow, both obligatory and acceptable in the sight of God. It seems, that it was then not uncommon for an undutiful and degenerate son, who wanted to be rid of the burden of supporting his parents, and in his wrath, to turn them adrift upon the wide world, to say to his father or mother, Korban, or, Be that Corban (consecrated) which I should appropriate to thy support; that is, Every thing wherewith I might ever aid or serve thee, and, of course, every thing, which I ought to devote to thy relief in the days of helpless old age, I here vow unto God.-A most abominable vow, indeed! and which God would, unquestionably, as little approve or accept, as he would a vow to commit adultery. And yet some of the Pharisees pronounced on such vows this strange decision; that they were absolutely obligatory, and that the son, who uttered such words, was bound to abstain from contributing, in the smallest article, to the use of his parents, because every thing, that should have been so appropriated, had become consecrated to God, and could no longer be applied to their use, without sacrilege and a breach of his vow. But on this exposition, Christ not

only remarked, that it abrogated the fifth commandment, but he likewise added, as a counter-doctrine, that Moses, their own legislator, had expressly declared, that the men who cursed father or mother deserved to die. Now, it is impossible for a man to curse his parents more effectually, than by a vow like this, when he interprets it with such rigour, as to preclude him from doing any thing in future for their benefit. It is not imprecating upon them a curse in the common style of curses, which evaporate into air; but it is fulfilling the curse, and making it to all intents and purposes effectual.” Of the two crimes above noticed, the act of striking a parent evinces the most depraved and wicked disposition: and severe as the punishment was, few parents would apply to a magistrate, until all methods had been tried in vain. Both these crimes are included in the case of the stubborn, rebellious, and drunkard son; whom his parents were unable to keep in order, and who, when intoxicated, endangered the lives of others. Such an irreclaimable offender was to be punished with stoning. (Deut. xxi. 18-21.) Severe as this law may seem, we have no instance recorded of its being carried into effect; but it must have had a most salutary operation in the prevention of crimes, in a climate like that of Palestine, where (as in all southern climates) liquor produces more formidable effects than with us, and where also it is most probable that at that time, the people had not the same efficacious means which we possess, of securing drunkards, and preventing them from doing mischief.

2. Civil government being an ordinance of God, provision is made in all well regulated states for respecting the persons of MAGISTRATES. We have seen in a former chapter, that when the regal government was established among the Israelites, the person of the king was inviolable, even though he might be tyrannical and unjust. It is indispensably necessary to the due execution of justice that the persons of magistrates be sacred, and that they should not be insulted in the discharge of their office. All reproachful words or curses, uttered against persons invested with authority, are prohibited in Exod. xxii. 28. No punishment, however, is specified; probably it was left to the discretion of the judge, and was different according to the rank of the magistrate and the extent of the crime.

III. The CRIMES or offences AGAINST PROPERTY, mentioned by Moses, are theft, man-stealing, and the denial of any thing taken in trust, or found.

1. On the crime of THEFT, Moses imposed the punishment of double (and in certain cases still higher) restitution; and if the thief were unable to make it (which, however, could rarely happen, as every Israelite by law had his paternal field, the crops of which might be attached), he was ordered to be sold for a slave, and payment was to be made to the injured party out of the purchase-money. (Exod. xxii. 1. 3.) The same practice obtains, according to Chardin, among the Persians. The wisdom of this regulation is much greater than the generality of mankind are aware of: for, as the desire of gain and the love of luxuries are the prevalent inducements to theft, restitution, varied according to circumstances, would effectually prevent the unlawful gratification of that desire, while the idle man would be deterred from stealing by the dread of slavery, in which he would be compelled to work by the power of blows. If, however, a thief was found breaking into a house in the night season, he might be killed (Exod. xxii. 2.), but not if the sun had arisen, in which case he might be known and apprehended, and the restitution made which was enjoined by Moses. When stolen oxen or sheep were found in the possession of a thief, he was to make a two-fold restitution to the owner, who thus obtained a profit for his risk of loss. (Exod. xxii. 4.) The punishment was applicable to every case in which the article stolen remained unaltered in his possession. But if it was already alienated or slaughtered, the criminal was to restore four-fold for a sheep, and five-fold for an ox (Exod. xxii. 1), in consequence of its great value and indispensable utility in agriculture, to the Israelites, who had no horses. In the time of Solomon, when property had become more valuable from the increase of commerce, the punishment of restitution was increased to seven-fold. (Prov. vi. 30, 31.) When a thief had nothing to pay, he was sold as a slave (Exod. xxii. 3.), probably for as many years as were necessary for the extinction of the debt, and of course, perhaps, for life; though in other cases the Hebrew servant could be made to serve only for six years. If, however, a thief, after having denied, even upon oath, any theft, with which he was charged, had the honesty or con1 Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. iv. p. 300. See p. 44. supra.