In the beginning of heaven and earth, all things were generated, and the five elements interacted through mutual generation and restraint, each indispensable. Metal, wood, water, fire, and earth had both affinities and aversions. The interplay of yin and yang enabled the nurturing of all things; thunder and lightning roared, and rain and dew nourished. In spring and summer, all things grew, while in autumn and winter, all things were gathered. The laws governing heaven and earth come from above. The sage resides between heaven and earth, emulating the will of heaven. People experience joy, anger, sorrow, and happiness, with emotional fluctuations leading to changes in behavior. By promoting good education, the people's customs become simple and pure. Therefore, it is necessary to establish different clothing systems, standardize attire to signify shame and warn against violations, so that people dare not violate them. However, as time passed, cunning and deceitful people began to emerge. Thus, clear laws must be enacted, and a system of rewards and punishments must be established. The "Book of Documents" states: "Use punishments to regulate behavior, with the five punishments being whipping, beating, capital punishment, exile, and pardon." Emperor Shun ordered Jiu Yao to say: "Each of the five punishments has its own service, and each of the five services has its own place." In the Xia Dynasty, the death penalty was two hundred, the punishment for kneecapping was three hundred, the palace punishment was five hundred, and both the punishment of the nose and the punishment of inking were one thousand each. The Yin Dynasty continued the practices of the Xia Dynasty, with slight increases and decreases. The "Rites of Zhou" records: establish three classics to govern the country, use five methods to understand the people's sentiments, supplement with eight discussions, and use three methods to adjudicate cases. The left Jia stone eases the people's grievances; the right stone of Fei understands the sufferings of the poor. Pardon ignorance, mistakes, and forgetfulness; pardon the young and weak, pardon the elderly and frail, pardon the foolish. After the decline of the Zhou Dynasty, King Mu grew old and inept, ordering Lord Lü to implement favorable punishments to serve as warnings throughout the realm, and the types of punishments also increased. For difficult cases, we should gather opinions widely and discuss them together; if everyone has doubts, a pardon should be granted, and careful consideration of the gravity of the matter must be made before a judgment is rendered. The former kings cared for the people so much that once a law was established, it could not be changed lightly.
In difficult cases, a wide range of opinions should be sought, and everyone should discuss together. If there are doubts among everyone, then a pardon should be considered. Careful consideration of the severity of the situation is necessary before making a judgment. The former kings loved their people as their own children; once the penal laws were established, they could not be changed lightly, so gentlemen must carry them out diligently. This indicates that ancient rulers valued public sentiment highly and embodied humanistic care and a cautious attitude in the process of formulating and enforcing laws. They did not solely depend on harsh laws for governance but focused more on education and guidance, striving to achieve the best state of combining legal principles with human feelings. This echoes the humanistic care and procedural justice seen in modern legal systems.
In summary, this passage describes in detail the evolution of criminal law in ancient China and the rulers' focus on and concern for the welfare of the people in governance. From the early concepts of yin, yang, and the five elements to the later system of five punishments, and then to the eight deliberations of the Zhou Dynasty, it reflects the continuous development and improvement of ancient Chinese legal thought. It also emphasizes the importance of fairness, justice, and humanity in the spirit of the rule of law. This is not only a microcosm of ancient history but also an inspiration for modern rule of law construction.
During the Warring States period, various feudal states favored harsh laws and mutual slaughter. Shang Yang used his six volumes of "Legal Classics" to persuade the Qin state, advocating for severe punishment of rebels and the implementation of laws that held families accountable for individual crimes. The social climate was corrupt, resembling a den of tigers and wolves. By the time of Qin Shi Huang, who unified the country, he abolished the system of the former kings, implemented a book banning policy, and laws spread like weeds in autumn, with legal nets as dense as congealed grease. Deceit and trickery emerged simultaneously, and the streets were crowded with people in ochre prison uniforms, prisons were overcrowded, and prisons were as common as markets. As a result, the populace was rife with grievances, with nine out of ten households opposing him.
After Liu Bang, the founding emperor of the Han dynasty, crossed the pass, he reduced harsh penalties and established a simplified three-chapter legal code. Emperor Wen of Han was known for his benevolence, deciding over four hundred cases and almost abolishing the death penalty. During the reign of Emperor Wu of Han, the number of corrupt individuals increased, resulting in the introduction of over fifty new laws. During the reign of Emperor Xuan, Lu Wenshu submitted a memorial that stated: "Prisons are crucial for the safety of the realm. The Book of Documents says: it is better to let the guilty go free than to wrongfully execute the innocent. The current prison officials are not devoid of compassion and kindness; rather, they compare themselves with one another, viewing severity as a virtue. Those who impose heavy sentences gain a good reputation, while those who impose lighter sentences invite future problems. As a result, prison officials wish for the prisoners' deaths, not out of malice, but to safeguard themselves. Human nature seeks comfort; in pain, one contemplates death. Under severe torture, what information cannot be extracted? Therefore, when prisoners can no longer withstand the torture, they fabricate lies to mislead. Prison officials take advantage of this and manipulate them into revealing the truth; fearing repercussions when reporting, they repeatedly torment until the matter is clarified. Even a wise figure like Gao Yao might consider a death sentence too lenient. The root of the world's calamities lies in the prison system, which poses a far greater threat than any other.
Ah! The harm caused by prison guards has persisted for a long time! It is said that in ancient times, prisons were established to save lives; however, today's prisons seem to serve the purpose of killing. This is absolutely unacceptable!" Emperor Xuan of Han strongly agreed with his statement. When Yu Dingguo served as the Minister of Justice, he compiled various laws into nine hundred sixty volumes, including four hundred ninety provisions for the death penalty, totaling one thousand eight hundred eighty-two types of crimes, and there were three thousand four hundred seventy-two circumstances in which the death penalty could be imposed, with a total of twenty-six thousand two hundred seventy-two legal articles applicable in various judgments. Throughout the two hundred years of the Eastern Han dynasty, the laws saw little significant change. Emperor Wei Wu, Cao Cao, established the Jiazi regulations, stipulating that those who committed theft would have their toes chopped off and would be subjected to leg shackles. Emperor Wei Ming modified the regulations regarding fines for the gentry and commoners, abolishing the whipping punishment for women. Emperor Jin Wu believed that the laws of the Wei dynasty were too harsh and ordered General Jia Chong to gather Confucian scholars to delete and reduce the legal articles, compiling them into twenty volumes, totaling over two thousand nine hundred articles.
After the fall of the Jin dynasty, the Central Plains were in chaos. The Wei state inherited the aftermath of the decline of the Western Jin dynasty, with institutions in disarray, rituals corrupted, and social morals in a dire state. It was not until Emperor Wei Taizu quelled the rebellions that the order of Huaxia was gradually restored. By the time of the Taihe period, officials were honest, politics were clear, and litigation cases decreased, signifying a restoration of social order after a century of chaos. Therefore, I intend to record these events.
In the early Wei state, the social atmosphere was straightforward, and the laws were rather lenient. After Emperor Xuan moved south, he reinstated the heads of four departments, directly handling cases in the royal court, primarily relying on oral agreements and contracts to manage affairs, without prisons or severe torture; individuals who committed crimes were judged and dealt with immediately. Later, due to the rulers' lack of attention, these systems saw little change.
By the time of Emperor Mu, Liu Cong and Shi Le had overthrown the Jin Dynasty. In order to quell the rebellion, Emperor Mu of Wei intensified punishments, essentially dealing with matters according to military law. Many common people, due to the previous lenient policies, violated orders, and the number executed reached as high as tens of thousands, leading to widespread unrest across the nation. Later, when Emperor Ping ascended the throne, the situation gradually stabilized, and he comforted the displaced people.
The decree issued in the second year of Emperor Zhao Cheng's reign declared: those sentenced to death were permitted to have their family present a golden horse for redemption; those convicted of treason would see all their relatives—regardless of age or gender—executed; those who did not adhere to proper conduct in relationships would all be executed; if people killed each other, they were allowed to compensate the deceased's family with forty-nine horses and cattle, as well as funeral supplies to settle the matter; the crimes of collusion and guilt by association were eliminated; those who stole from the government had to compensate five times the value, while those who stole private property had to compensate ten times. The laws were straightforward and clear, enabling the common people to live and work in peace.
Emperor Taizu experienced many hardships in his youth and understood the genuine concerns of the common people. After taking power, he implemented benevolent governance and lived in harmony with the people. After pacifying the Central Plains, he felt that the previous dynasty's laws were excessively harsh, so he ordered the Three Dukes and the official Wang De to revise those overly severe laws and simplify the legal texts. At that time, the common people were suffering from the ravages of war, yearning for peace while fearing the law. Emperor Taizu understood the people's sentiments and adopted lenient policies and imposed lighter punishments, which earned him the strong support of the people. However, he insisted on strict law enforcement against his ministers. In his later years, as disasters became increasingly frequent and his health declined, national discipline relaxed, and punishments became relatively severe.
After Emperor Taizong ascended the throne, he reformed the bureaucracy and showed empathy for the people's suffering, appointing Duke Nanping Zhangsun Song and Marquis Beixin An Tong to handle civil litigation, gradually restoring order to national affairs. However, due to the emperor's strict requirements for handling state affairs, the officials began to resort to schemes, employing various tactics to evade accountability.
After Emperor Shizu ascended to the throne, punishments for crimes were extremely harsh. He ordered Situ Hao to reestablish laws and regulations. This new decree abolished penalties for those aged five and under, but the original punishments were increased by one year. The death penalty was divided into two types: beheading and hanging. Those who committed treasonous acts would be torn apart by chariots, and their relatives would be implicated; those under fourteen would face the punishment of "lingchi," while women would be taken into government servitude. Those who killed their parents would be subjected to execution. Anyone using poisonous sorcery, regardless of gender, would be executed and their homes burned down. As for those practicing witchcraft, they would be made to carry a ram on their backs and hold a dog, then drowned.
Criminals could pay for their offenses, while the poor would have to endure an additional two hundred lashes. Wealthy individuals near the capital were required to go to the mountains to make charcoal, the poor had to work in latrines, and women were tasked with grinding rice. Those unable to perform labor due to illness would guard the royal gardens. Officials ranked above the ninth grade could use their official titles to offset their penalties. Pregnant women who committed crimes would have their punishments postponed for one hundred days after giving birth. Those under fourteen would have their penalties reduced by half; individuals aged eighty or ninety would not be held accountable unless they committed murder. During interrogations, the number of strikes during torture could not exceed forty-nine.
When determining sentences, department heads had to write reports, which were then reviewed by the public carriage supervisor, who would interrogate the criminals, and finally, a joint decision would be made by the three judicial offices. For those sentenced to death, all case files had to be submitted to the emperor. Because the dead cannot be resurrected, the emperor was concerned that supervising officials might not handle cases impartially, so all finalized case files had to be submitted to him for personal review. If there were no objections or grievances, the judgment would be executed. All states and counties must report to the court for approval before carrying out death sentences.
On the left side of the palace hung the petition drum; if the people had grievances, they could beat the drum to lodge a complaint, which would then be submitted to the court via the public carriage supervisor.
Later, corruption and bribery among officials became quite serious, and the emperor sought a way to address the issue. In the third year of Taiyan, the emperor ordered that officials and common people nationwide could report the illegal activities of local officials. As a result, whenever the common people discovered even the slightest wrongdoing, they would seize on the mistakes of local officials, pressuring those in power to extort money from the people. Local officials, terrified, became overly cautious, only wanting to protect their positions, and did not feel ashamed at all; their corrupt behavior continued as before.
The emperor personally led troops into battle several times and often toured various regions. In the fifth year of Zhenjun, the emperor appointed Gongzong to handle all state affairs and entrusted him with governance. Shaofu Youya submitted a memorial saying, "Your Highness personally handling state affairs, taking on both internal and external matters, starting work early in the morning, and frequently consulting with the senior ministers. My position is minor, and I can only do my best to offer advice. During the reign of Emperor Wu of Han, four districts were established in Hexi, where some suspected or convicted individuals were exiled. After more than a decade, the border regions were strengthened, and agriculture and military settlements developed. Emperor Xian and Emperor Xuanzong continued this method, successfully pacifying the north. This is a recent occurrence! Emperors do not simply seek to vent their anger by executing criminals; they hope for their reform and punishment. The hardships of exile are already a severe punishment. If one has not committed an unforgivable crime, exile can be considered; even if a family relocates to a distant place, they would be glad to make the journey, and even if they serve as laborers for life, they would not dare to complain. Moreover, being exiled far away and separated from family might even inspire thoughts of being a good person. This way, the number of wrongdoers will decrease, and border defenses will strengthen." Gongzong found his reasoning sound, but did not implement it.
In the spring of the sixth year, because some officials were making unjust rulings, the emperor ordered that all difficult cases be handed over to the Zhongshu Sheng to be judged according to ancient legal texts. Previously, the law regarding theft stated that stealing forty pieces of cloth would result in the death penalty, but many common people ignored the law, so the government increased the penalties, declaring that stealing just three pieces of cloth would also lead to execution. In the first year of the Zhengping reign, the emperor issued an edict saying: “The law's net is too tight, and the number of lawbreakers is increasing; I feel a great deal of sympathy for them. We must carefully review the laws and strive for a balance, and any provisions that are not beneficial to the people must be amended.” Thus, You Ya, along with Zhongshu Shilang Hu Fang and others, collaborated to revise the legal system. The law on theft was reverted to its original provisions, and new offenses such as harboring, informing, and concealing were introduced, totaling three hundred ninety-one articles. Among these, four articles dealt with the crime of exterminating a family; one hundred forty-five of those were death penalties, while two hundred twenty-one were for other offenses. Although the officials made some modifications to the articles, they still failed to clarify the legal texts.
Initially, Emperor Gaozong still followed the old customs. It wasn't until the fourth year of Tai'an that the ban on alcohol was instituted. At that time, there were abundant harvests every year, but many common people often stirred up trouble and ended up in lawsuits due to drinking. Some people suggested that the emperor should address this issue. The emperor was displeased with this situation, so he imposed a total ban on alcohol. Those who brewed, sold, or drank alcohol faced execution. However, exceptions were allowed for certain special occasions such as weddings, funerals, and banquets, but prior notification was required. He also increased the number of internal and external inspectors, conducting covert inspections of various departments and local government offices, and even making undercover visits to identify officials' misconduct. Those officials who were found out were subjected to severe torture by the relevant authorities. Numerous instances of false accusations and framing also occurred, often on charges of "disrespect." Any official found to have embezzled more than two zhang of cloth faced execution. He also introduced 79 new legal provisions, which included 13 provisions for gatekeepers, 35 death penalties, and 62 other penalties. During a time of peace, the Governor of Jizhou, Yuan He, submitted a memorial stating, "If they have not committed the heinous crime of rebellion and murder, spare their lives and assign them to border duty." The emperor agreed. After Emperor Xianzu ascended the throne, he abolished the charge of "verbal error" and lifted the ban on alcohol. This emperor was dedicated to governance, and everyone in the court felt a sense of intimidation from him. When Emperor Huizu succeeded to the throne, he continued to take a hands-on approach to governance, maintained strict enforcement of the law, promoted officials of integrity and honesty, and weeded out the greedy and incompetent. These honest county officials were frequently celebrated by the populace.
In the fourth year of the Yanxing era, the emperor decreed that if a person was not guilty of treason, only the individual involved would be punished, and the punishment for the doorkeeper was abolished. From the time the case was handed over to the Ministry of Justice for re-examination, the enforcement of the law gradually diminished, ultimately resulting in the system's abolition. If there were major doubts in a case, discussions would be held among all parties to resolve it. Prior to this, many matters submitted by various departments raised questions that needed clarification, and verbal edicts were sometimes altered. Therefore, regardless of the size of the matter, everything had to be managed strictly according to legal provisions, without any ambiguity in consultations. Those that complied with the regulations would be approved, while those that did not would be subject to criticism and accountability, and all matters had to be processed through formal edicts. From that point on, everything was handled with great attention to detail, and subordinates no longer dared to deceive each other.
During the late reign of Emperor Xianzu, he placed special emphasis on punishments, which made people uncomfortable to talk about. Every time a case was tried, he would personally review it, and some prisoners had been locked up for years without a resolution. The ministers brought this up with him several times. The Emperor said, "Although having a backlog of cases is not a good way to govern, it is better than hastily trying and wronging innocent people. When people are locked up and suffer, they tend to think about their actions, so prisons and paradise aren't that different. I want them to regret what they did and change their ways, and then get lighter punishments." Therefore, although the prisoners were detained for a long time, most punishments were fair enough. Also, because the Emperor issued orders multiple times, those ignorant and cruel people got a bit lucky, so from the Yanxing period to the Emperor Xianzu's death, there was no general amnesty. When officials responsible for trying cases carried out punishments, the most they could hit someone was fifty strokes, but some officials who wanted to let people go used thin bamboo sticks, while those who wanted to frame others used large bamboo sticks for severe beatings. A lot of regular folks couldn't take it and ended up falsely accusing others, and some even got beaten to death. Emperor Xianzu was aware of this and decided to set new rules. The sticks used for punishment had to be made of rattan, with the joints smoothed out. The thickness of the sticks used for interrogating prisoners was one-third of the standard, for beating the back it was two-thirds, for beating the calves it was one-tenth, and all beatings had to follow the rules. Basically, they tried to keep things as light and straightforward as they could.
During the reign of Emperor Gaozu, great importance was placed on criminal law as well. In the past, those sentenced to death had to strip naked and were forced to lie on the ground for punishment; those sentenced to death were executed by hanging. Although there were legal provisions, but they were not enforced. In the first year of the Taihe era, the emperor issued a decree stating: "The purpose of criminal law is to prevent violence and curb wrongdoing; taking a person's life does not depend on stripping them of their clothes. Everyone should carefully consult previous texts and strive for leniency." Officials such as Situ Yuanpi submitted a memorial saying: "Your Majesty is benevolent and generous, allowing those punished to avoid the humiliation of being stripped. People across the realm are grateful for your benevolence, and there is no greater fortune than this. We believe that those who commit treason and rebellion should be executed by beheading, but they should remain clothed; thieves and corrupt officials should be hanged, and their bodies should be discarded in the wilderness." The emperor issued another decree saying: "The reason the common people obey the law is not due to harsh punishments. Although preventive measures are strict, those who are wronged are often more numerous. Now, those sentenced to death are all beheaded, and they are also required to be stripped naked, with men and women punished together. How can this be seen as following the law and showing respect? Now I will reform related regulations."
First of all, because the legal provisions are incomplete, corrupt officials abuse the law, leading to inconsistent sentencing. The emperor ordered the Minister of the Central Secretariat, Gao Lu, and relevant officials to amend the old legal provisions according to the actual situation. He also ordered all officials to participate in the discussion, and the final draft was approved by the emperor himself. In the winter of the fifth year, a total of 832 articles were revised, including 16 articles on the punishment of the gatekeepers (an ancient form of punishment), 235 articles on the death penalty, and 377 articles on penal servitude; except for the principal instigators of collective robbery, who were punished with the gatekeeper's punishment, those guilty of more serious crimes were only punished with decapitation.
Next, at that time, judicial officials and officials from various prefectures and counties would not judge cases based on the actual situation. They would lock up the prisoners with thick and large shackles, and even hang large stones on the prisoners' necks with ropes, torturing them to the point of internal injuries and bone fractures; they would also have strong men take turns beating the prisoners. Unable to endure the torture, prisoners often confessed under duress. The officials saw this as a skill and took pride in their methods. When the emperor heard about this, he was very distressed, and therefore ordered that unless one committed a heinous crime and there was no conclusive evidence, such cruel torture could not be used. The law stipulated: "For embezzlement (corruption), ten bolts of cloth, or two hundred bolts of cloth received as bribes, all punishable by death." It was not until the eighth year that the salary system was officially established, and it was redefined that receiving one bolt of cloth as a bribe would result in death, and embezzlement, regardless of the amount, would be punishable by death. In the autumn of that year, the emperor sent envoys to inspect the entire country and correct the illegal actions of local officials. More than forty officials were executed for bribery. Those officials receiving salaries were all on edge, and the practice of bribery had nearly vanished. The emperor felt deep sympathy for those who had committed crimes. When reviewing petitions and judgments, he mostly handed down lenient sentences, exempting them from the death penalty and exiling them to the border regions, with over a thousand people receiving such sentences each year. In the capital, there were only five or six death penalty cases throughout the year, and the situation in various prefectures and counties was similar.
In the spring of the eleventh year, the emperor decreed, "Among the three thousand charges, there is no greater crime than being unfilial. However, the punishment for being unfilial in the law is only head shaving, which is unreasonable. It should be revised." He further decreed, "Previously, the officials were ordered to discuss and determine the criminal code, but the punishment of executing a whole family still exists in the law, which contradicts the principle of 'different punishments for fathers and sons' found in the Book of Zhou. There is no rational basis for this practice in ancient classics, so it should be reconsidered and these cruel punishments should be removed." In the autumn of the eighth month, the emperor decreed, "The law specifies a three-year prison term, after which the matter is considered resolved. There should not be severe punishment, yet crimes are divided into death penalty and acquittal. The law articles should be carefully reviewed, and any such cases should be revised." In the winter of the tenth month, the emperor again ordered the officials to participate in discussions. In the twelfth year, the emperor decreed, "For individuals who commit capital offenses and have elderly parents or grandparents, without adult children or other relatives, they should report based on the actual situation and make a decision, and this provision should be written into the law." Emperor Shizong ascended the throne with the intention of implementing lenient politics. In the winter of the first year of Zhengshi, he issued a decree stating, "The establishment of laws and the handling of cases are crucial for the security of the country. The severity of laws changes with the times. The previous dynasty attached great importance to the legal code and statutes, and made some modifications, but at that time there were wars and corvée, so there was no time for careful study. Therefore, there are still many doubts and errors in practical application. The Ministry of Personnel and the Secretariat can discuss laws and regulations in collaboration with the Ministry of Works. Any doubts must be carefully considered, the old and new laws must be carefully examined, and the reasoning behind them must be seriously pondered. Any necessary changes must be made thoroughly. Each confirmed law article must be reported to me separately. This is the only way we can adapt to changing times and establish a long-lasting, effective system."
This imperial edict means that the emperor believes some aspects of the previous laws are not entirely appropriate and need to be revised and refined based on practical circumstances. Therefore, he has instructed the relevant departments to thoroughly research and develop more comprehensive laws and regulations to serve the common people. He particularly emphasized the importance of careful study and avoiding hasty actions, ensuring that the laws are both timely and sustainable. This reflects Emperor Sejong's commitment to good governance and his desire for lasting stability in the country.
In the autumn of the first year of Yongping, in the seventh month, the emperor ordered the ministers to investigate various violations of the regulations regarding restraints, determine responsibility, and decide on punishments. Minister Gao Zhao, Minister Pu She Qinghe Wang Yi, Minister Xing Luan, Minister Li Ping, and Minister Jiangyang Wang Ji submitted a memorial together, stating: "We have heard that the emperor should inherit the legacy of the Son of Heaven, serve as the guardians of the people, guide them with moral education, and restrain them with laws. Whether it is a major issue or a minor matter, reasoning should be emphasized, compassion should be shown, and we should avoid being overly pleased. The principle of 'three inquiries and five listens' must be followed, and cases should not be decided like wooden or stone objects. We believe that Your Majesty loves the people and your grace is as vast as heaven and earth. Your amendments to laws and regulations demonstrate a kindness greater than that of the ancient sage Shang Tang. Due to concerns that the use of shackles did not comply with regulations and could harm the lives of the people, you issued a compassionate decree and extended wide-ranging favors. Even the cautiousness in case judgments during the time of Emperor Shun and the extreme sympathy for the people by Emperor Wen of Han cannot match your kindness. We carefully reviewed the "Regulations for Prison Officials": all officials handling cases must first adhere to the principle of 'five listens', strive to seek the truth, and verify evidence. Only when there are many doubts about a case, and even if the accused has not confessed, can torture be used. Those who deserve exile or harsher punishments can be put in shackles. Different forms of torture should not be used together. For crimes other than treason and rebellion, oversized shackles, tall wooden yokes, heavy instruments, and stone torture should not be used. However, local officials have escalated these practices as routine. They have violated the principle of 'five listens' and disobeyed legal provisions, and they should be investigated and punished according to your decree. However, these practices have been entrenched for quite some time, so it is not appropriate to investigate past responsibilities. As for the size of shackles and the length of whips, unified standards should be set, but there were no clear regulations on the weight of shackles before. After consideration, we have set the dimensions for large shackles: one zhang and three chi in length, with a wooden board under the chin and five-inch-wide cheeks, to be used for major crimes like treason and rebellion; handcuffs and shackles are for those sentenced to exile or harsher punishments. All large shackles in government offices should be burned. Shackles are intended for detaining individuals, not for inflicting pain. From now on, all cases must be decided according to legal provisions, with thorough investigation and evidence collection. Torture should only be used when there is substantial evidence, and illegal torture, especially with stones, is strictly prohibited."
I'm here to help! It looks like the text you wanted to provide for translation isn't here; please share it, and I'll be happy to translate it for you.
Since then, the specifications for the staff members have had clear standards. It wasn't long before the prison officials began to abuse their power again, and the punishments gradually intensified.
The "Legal Code" states: "For officials of the five ranks and serving officials, if they commit a crime, they shall be punished according to the standards applicable to fifth-rank officials, with a two-year reduction in their sentence; those who are dismissed from office cannot hold an official position again for three years, and their rank shall be lowered by one level."
In the spring of the second year of the Yan Chang era, the Minister of Justice, Xing Luan, submitted a report saying: "Upon careful consideration, among the officials below the princes, some assist the emperor in governing the country, while others have made great contributions, who have all been granted land and titles to the people, acting as the pillars of the royal family. The five ranks of nobility are also conferred based on merit; though their ranks differ, their titles resonate as prominently as the mountains and rivers, and it is not easy to obtain them, but once lost, they are gone forever. Currently, the law punishes them equally, yet their reputations vary significantly. Therefore, I propose we discuss what should be done and establish a permanent system."
The emperor ordered a discussion of the legal provisions, allowing the eight departments (referring to eight governmental offices) and the Ministry of Rites to deliberate together. Everyone agreed: "If an official commits a crime and is dismissed, their punishment should be based on their official rank, allowing for some leniency, and they could be demoted by one rank if appropriate. However, for the five ranks of nobility, if their crimes are adjudicated, their titles will be permanently revoked, which is akin to dismissal and deviates from the original provisions. I propose that for officials below the princes who hold land, if they commit a crime and are dismissed, after three years, their noble rank should be reduced by one level: a prince becomes a duke, a duke to a count, a count to a marquis, a marquis to a viscount, a viscount to a baron, a baron to a commoner, and a commoner to a township commoner. Those of the five ranks should also be demoted according to this standard, down to the rank of a commoner without land. The township commoner holds the lowest rank, and after three years, they can be reinstated to their previous rank." The emperor agreed to this proposal.
In that autumn of a certain year, the Gao brothers: the eldest, Gao Xian, was a minister of seals; the second, Gao Zhongxian, was a gentleman riding attendant; and their uncle, Gao Liuzhen, was the chief clerk of the Ministry of Works—were implicated due to their younger brother Gao Jixian's rebellion alongside Yuan Yu, and all were stripped of their official positions and reduced to commoners. Later, a general amnesty was declared, and the emperor issued an edict stating that this matter would be considered settled and no further inquiries would be made.
As a result, Minister Xing Luan jumped out and said, “That young man Gao Jixian participated in the rebellion and even helped issue proclamations to incite rebellion in Youzhou and Yingzhou; this is a grave crime! According to the law, his entire family should be exterminated! His brothers and uncle should also be punished alongside him, as this is clearly stipulated. Although the emperor has granted a general amnesty and they have regained their lives, being stripped of their positions and reduced to commoners is already a fortunate outcome. However, the crime of rebellion is too serious, and the implications are far-reaching. Since they are implicated together and have committed the same crime, how can they be pardoned when those who were supposed to be executed before the amnesty are only stripped of their positions afterwards? Moreover, the crime of implication cannot simply be resolved by stripping them of their positions. Consider those minor crimes of embezzlement or petty theft; as long as there is solid evidence of the stolen goods, they can be pardoned during a general amnesty. How can the Gao brothers, who have committed such a serious crime, have their family punished together, with those who were supposed to be executed before the amnesty actually executed, yet afterwards they can still be reinstated? According to the law, they should be exterminated as a family, and according to the customary practice of amnesty, they should also be stripped of their positions and reduced to commoners. The ancients believed that for those who conspire to rebel, their houses should be destroyed, their palaces defiled, their descendants severed, and their families exterminated; if even their houses should be discarded, how much more so the people! Therefore, I request that they be dealt with according to the law and stripped of their positions!” The emperor said, “Those sentenced to death were already dead before the amnesty, and the gentleman riding attendant is not a proper minister, so let them be reinstated.”
After three years, the Minister, Li Ping, once again submitted a memorial saying: "In Fucheng, Jizhou, there was a woman named Fei Yangpi (Fei is the family name, and Yangpi is the given name) who died, and her family was so poor that they couldn't even afford to hold a funeral. They sold her seven-year-old daughter to Zhang Hui in the same city to serve as a maid. Zhang Hui then resold the girl to Liang Dingzhi in Shuxian, but did not mention that she was a respectable woman. According to the law regarding theft, 'those who kidnap, resell, or conspire to sell people as slaves shall be sentenced to death.' Zhang Hui knew he had bought the girl, yet still intended to resell her for profit. According to the law, he should be sentenced to death." The Emperor said: "The law's definition of 'conspiring to sell people' refers to two people conspiring to cheat others out of their money. Fei Yangpi willingly sold her daughter, and even told Zhang Hui she was a respectable woman. Zhang Hui bought her because she was cheap and he knew the girl was bought. This does not align with the law since neither party intended to commit fraud. Although the girl was sold by her family, she was originally a respectable woman. When Zhang Hui resold her, he should have hesitated, but he still sold her in the end. From a logical standpoint, this approach is flawed. We must establish new regulations for similar cases in the future."
Yang Jun Shaoqing said at the time: "I carefully studied the laws regarding theft, and it states that 'those who rob people or traffic in people for slavery shall be sentenced to death.' There's another provision stating that 'those who sell their own descendants shall receive a one-year prison sentence.' Selling law-abiding citizens is the same behavior, but the penalties differ greatly; this is because the law judges sentences based on specific circumstances, so there will be distinctions in the severity of crimes. Looking at the provision that 'for collective theft and robbery, the principal offender and accomplices are sentenced the same,' it should be the same as the crime of robbing people. Furthermore, 'those who knowingly buy stolen goods shall be treated as accomplices.' However, the law has clear regulations regarding transactions between relatives, but it doesn't specify the penalties for buyers. I believe that since all are handled according to the same laws, if the punishment for transactions between relatives is reduced because of their familial ties, then the degree of punishment for the buyer should not exceed that of the seller. However, the law does not state that a daughter sold as a maid can be redeemed. Zhang Hui did indeed buy her, treating it as an ordinary transaction, and until the day she was resold, there was nothing suspicious about it. This is because he bought her from the girl's father and then sold her to someone else; this is quite similar to cases of human trafficking, and there is a rationale behind it.
Now, let’s examine the annotations on intimidation: 'If the elder has already agreed, intimidating someone younger or of lower status to demand something.' Although the methods of intimidation are the same, those who are not punished for it are exempt because the elder has already consented. Zhang Hui originally bought the maid from Yang Pi and then truly sold her to someone else. According to this regulation, there is a prior reason; if we trace the cause, the rationale is quite similar."
Cui Hongyi stated that the law stipulates: "Selling one's own child is punishable by one year in prison; selling relatives within five degrees of kinship, if the elder has died, then the seller, along with his concubine, children, and daughters-in-law, shall be exiled." However, the law only states that the seller is guilty, not the buyer. But this is not right! Since the seller is guilty, the buyer should also be held accountable. However, the seller is guilty due to human frailty or neglect of their relatives, along with the hierarchical distinctions, so the degree of culpability differs. The buyer knowingly makes the purchase and shares no blood relation with the person being sold, which is different from the seller's situation.
As stated in the law, "selling relatives within five degrees of kinship, if the elder has died," this situation is not akin to robbery; it constitutes a legitimate sale, so the sentencing is very different. Since the seller is guilty, the buyer must also bear some responsibility; it cannot be as you say, the buyer's culpability cannot be entirely contingent upon the seller's actions. Moreover, the buyer and the individual being sold share no blood relation, so why should the degree of guilt be different? In addition, the law also has another provision: "knowingly selling stolen property will result in punishment for the accomplice." According to this statement, knowing that the person is a good citizen who was stolen, after buying, the punishment only extends to exile. However, transactions involving relatives differ significantly from ordinary robbery cases, so the buyer cannot be treated the same. If such a punishment would be excessively harsh and should be mitigated at the court's discretion, resulting in a sentence of five years in prison.
As for the buyer, if they knowingly purchase someone who is a law-abiding citizen, without asking how they came to be in that situation, and even resell them without clarifying their identity, resulting in the person being lost and their family unable to find them, doomed to remain an outcast with no hope of redemption, then how is this any different from robbery? Strict laws can help deter crime, while lenient laws only encourage more people to break the law, as ancient texts have long made clear. If someone buys a relative of another person and then resells them without clarifying their identity or background, they should face the same penalties as a robber.
Tai Bao and King Gaoyang Yong discussed: "In the case of Zhang Hui, convicting him on theft charges is completely unrelated to robbery. The evidence is solid and far removed from theft. Using the provisions of theft to convict him of robbery is inappropriate. In my opinion, knowing the person who bought the stolen goods, there is no specific provision for the crime. Why do I say this? 'A group of robbers, without a leader and accomplice, are all equally guilty,' so the crime of robbery should be the same. Understanding this point, there is no specific provision, and the conviction relies on similar cases. I believe that selling abducted people is as serious as robbery, and can be considered 'deserved punishment.' Looking at the case, according to the "Law of Thieves": 'If someone is caught plotting murder, the accomplice is sentenced to five years of exile; if someone is injured but survives, the principal offender is sentenced to death and the accomplice to exile; if someone is killed, the principal offender is beheaded and the accomplice who participated is sentenced to death, while those who did not participate are exiled.' Consider this: which is more serious, selling abducted people or killing them? However, the Law of Thieves punishes murder involving leaders and accomplices, but there is no distinction between principal offenders and accomplices for stealing people and then selling them. Murder and robbery are both serious crimes and should be treated as such. Therefore, the punishment for murder should be reduced to a form of punishment for robbery. Even murder and robbery can be used as examples, as if they are being treated lightly. What is the reason behind this? It also states: 'Those who knowingly buy stolen goods are considered accomplices.' This clearly prohibits the root of robbery and thievery, and is not the same as the punishment for robbery committed by relatives. I believe that buying and selling among relatives within five generations is lawful, so there can be different crimes, which are far removed from robbery. Therefore, the severity of the crime should be determined based on the relationship between relatives. According to the law: 'All co-conspirators are considered offenders based on the intentions of the principal offender.' Understanding the reason for the purchase and sale, the responsibilities of the principal offender and accomplice should be clarified. If the sheepskin did not indicate it was for sale, then Zhang Hui did not have the intention to buy it, making the sheepskin the principal offender and Zhang Hui the accomplice. The principal offender should face the appropriate punishment, while the accomplice should also receive their due penalty. When applying the law, there is no basis for the responsibility of the buyer, which should be assessed based on the seller's responsibility."
"Upon closer examination of my opinion, those who buy good people from other relatives and resell them without disclosing their origins should be punished with the same severity as robbery. Since they have already become concubines, whether sold or not, they are no longer good people. Why is it acceptable not to sell, but unforgivable to resell? Zhang Hui deserves a hundred lashes for his offense. Selling a daughter to arrange a funeral for her mother is commendable filial piety, but I have not heard of any rewards for this; the punishment has already been lightened. I fear this does not promote moral education among the populace. I request that the crime of selling should be exempted in exchange for public compensation of the sale price." The emperor said, "Selling a daughter to arrange a funeral for her mother is commendable filial piety and can be granted a special pardon. Although Zhang Hui bought her from her father, he should not have resold her and is sentenced to five years of exile."
At first, when the royal family committed offenses, everyone turned a blind eye, and no one pursued the matter. At that time, there was a royal official named Yuan Xianfu who committed a crime and needed to be interrogated. The official responsible for royal affairs wanted to handle it according to the previous rules. Minister Li Ping submitted a memorial stating, "The imperial family's influence is extensive and reaches far and wide, but their family ties are relatively weak, and their official ranks are quite low. They should not receive special treatment just because they are royal; those who violate the law should be held accountable. I believe a timeframe should be set for handling these cases to serve as a standard moving forward."
The emperor issued a decree saying: "There are many descendants of the royal family, and their descendants are flourishing and spread throughout the realm. However, among them, there are also many among them who engage in misconduct. In the past, there were no regulations preventing the investigation of the crimes of the royal family, and they took advantage of their status to act recklessly, resulting in a growing prevalence of lawlessness and disorder. Cases that are not within the scope of this discussion shall be handled according to normal legal procedures." "The clouds come and go, the generations thrive, and the lineage grows, but there are also many who do wrong. The previous dynasty had no regulations against investigation, yet they relied on their status to long defy the law. Those matters not under discussion may all be handled according to the usual laws."
In June of that year, the Minister of Justice Yuan Zhi and others presented a memorial stating: According to legal provisions, "case completion" indicates that the case has been thoroughly examined and the criminal has been convicted. However, the current situation is that some cases, although they have been charged and re-examined, with the charges clearly established and the case files divided into two parts, appear to be concluded. Yet, even if a case is concluded and reported to the court, sometimes the court feels that the facts of the case have not been fully clarified, or someone is obstructing the process, or there are still doubts from the Ministry of Rites, resulting in the case being reassigned for further investigation. As a result, the case returns to an unresolved state. Even more outrageous is that if some criminals' families appeal, and the court believes their one-sided claims and prevents the case from being concluded, this constitutes favoritism and undermines justice. Why do I say this? Because in this way, those who resort to deceit will become increasingly audacious; they will find ways to delay their sentences or hope for unexpected pardons, using all sorts of sweet words to confuse judges and distort the truth. If this continues, it will foster corruption among the people and undermine the country's laws, which deeply concerns us.
Zheng Cuizuan of Dali, evaluator Yang Ji, Minister Jiang Xiaoxiu, and law doctor Liu Anyuan argue that legal provisions stipulate that if a case has been closed, even if a judgment has been made, if there are suspicions of fraud, violations of legal regulations, or wrongful accusations on appeal, it is possible to reopen the investigation and trial. Cases convicted by prosecutors, even if closed, may be reopened due to an impeachment by the Censorate, discovering wrongful accusations; or because of torture, failing to obtain truthful confessions, resulting in convictions based solely on the evidence; or because of the prosecutor's personal interests, coercing the accused into confession; or if the accused's family appeals, claiming contradictions between their statements and the case records. Punishments should not be imposed lightly and must be thoroughly examined. If this is truly about justice, how can favoritism be allowed? Handling cases as if they are already closed contradicts the legal provisions for reopening trials. However, receiving a pardon either before a judgment or after a case is reopened—when the truth remains unclear—poses a problem. In similar past cases, convicts have been restored to their official positions. We believe that a case can only be considered closed after receiving a pardon upon petitioning the court or after it has been reopened.
Minister Li Shao stated that even if a case has been closed, if it is reported to the Court of Judicial Review and forwarded to the provincial departments, if the accused's family appeals and the minister acknowledges their complaint, reopening the investigation and trial without a pardon cannot be considered closed. From a logical perspective, I find the views of Zheng Cuizuan and the others to be valid. The emperor ultimately accepted their recommendations.
During the Xiping period, there was a big bad guy in Jizhou named Prince Yanling Mai who committed a crime and ran away. Even after the amnesty deadline was up, he still wouldn't come back and turn himself in. Pei Yanjun, the Minister of Justice back then, said: "According to the 'Law Code', anyone who's on the run and doesn’t come back after the amnesty deadline will be punished again for their original crimes. According to the 'Law on Bandits', Prince Yanling Mai committed the serious crime of treason and should be executed as a warning. Additionally, his buddy, Liu Jinghui, who calls himself 'Moonlight Kid', has been spreading lies and should also be executed for what he did after the amnesty."
However, Cui Zuan disagreed. He said, "Liu Jinghui claims he can transform into a snake and a pheasant; these are merely baseless rumors spread by others. It is indeed unreasonable to kill him, but what concerns me is that if we pardon him, he might confuse the people again. So I feel very hesitant and don't dare to decide on my own. We are in an era of great magnanimity under the Emperor; we should not indiscriminately kill the innocent. Liu Jinghui is only nine years old, still a child, and has not fully outgrown his childhood. Those chaotic matters are not his concern. The title 'Moonlight Boy' was not something he claimed for himself; it was deliberately framed by those corrupt officials, which reflects the saying 'the guilty thief catches the thief.' Even if one claims he has spread false words to mislead the public, according to the law, he deserves death. However, more importantly, killing him will not solve the problem of misleading the public. The amnesty decree has already been issued, and now we are pursuing his crimes; this charge isn't even covered by the law, and we are looking for additional faults. In this case, how can the amnesty decree be trusted? Wouldn't people doubt the amnesty decree's credibility? The Book of Documents says: 'It is better to let the guilty go than to wrongfully kill the innocent.' Furthermore, according to the 'Legal Code,' 'those over eighty years old and under eight years old, for murder and injury, must be reported to the court for a ruling.'
The report from the official government in Sizhou stated: "In Hedong County, there is a common folk named Li Lian who has poisoned others, and according to the law, he should be sentenced to death. His mother appealed, saying: 'I am already old, and I have no other relatives. I request leniency.' After checking the household registration records and before the judgment could be reported, Li Lian's mother passed away. The prefectural government decided to postpone the execution until the three-year mourning period was over." Xu Yan, a legal officer at the Situ Mansion, thought the ruling of the prefectural government was reasonable.
However, Li Yao, the clerk, disagreed, saying: "According to the 'Code of Law,' for those who commit a capital offense, if their grandparents or parents are over seventy years old, have no adult descendants, and no other relatives around them, they can write a petition for forgiveness. If it is a criminal who is to be exiled, they can be whipped first, then stay to take care of their relatives, and be exiled after their relatives pass away. But this does not include cases of pardon. Li Lian requested forgiveness, and this matter should not be decided by the prefectural government. The punishment for poisoning and murder should be execution by beheading, and the wife should be exiled, which is a more severe crime than what the law prescribes. From a logical and legal perspective, the ruling of the prefectural government is too lenient. Furthermore, since Li Lian dared to poison others, it indicates that he is heartless and disregards his neighbors. When his mother was alive, she should have turned him in, let alone now that his mother has passed away, should he be given three years to mourn? Even if he were granted a few days to take care of funeral arrangements, it would merely be an act of mercy. Now that the mourning is over, why prolong this? He should be executed according to the law, and his wife should be exiled. Only then can it serve as a warning to the public and uphold the dignity of the law." The Minister Xiao Baoyan supported Li Yao's opinion, and the emperor approved it.
The old system regulations stipulate that positions such as Zhige, Zhihou, and Zhizhai, which are ranks of the imperial guards, as well as the leaders and deputy leaders of military officers, though their treatment is akin to that of official positions, cannot escape punishment if they commit crimes. The Minister of Personnel, Rencheng Wang Cheng, submitted a memorial saying, "Consider the officials in various provinces; they are not official positions specified in the rank sequence, nor do they have salaries and allowances. Since the previous dynasty, they have been punished for committing crimes in the same way. Those responsible for palace security bear the heavy responsibility of defending the royal family and should not be treated differently." Empress Dowager Ling agreed and allowed the punishment of the officials according to the law.
Lanling Princess's husband Liu Hui, along with Zhang Zhishou's sister Rong Fei and Chen Qinghe's sister Huimeng, got together and were involved in scandalous affairs, even hitting a pregnant woman and injuring the child. Liu Hui, fearing retribution, fled.
The department reported, "All are to be sentenced to death; Zhang Zhishou and Chen Qinghe were also sentenced to exile for knowing about the incident and not intervening." The emperor said, "Rong Fei and Huimeng are spared from death; they are to have their heads shaved, be whipped, and then sent back to the palace. Others will be executed according to the memorial."
The Third Rank Minister of Personnel, Cui Zuan, disagreed, saying, "Your Majesty decreed that anyone who captures Liu Hui will receive a two-rank promotion, the common people a one-rank promotion, the servants exempt from corvee, and the maidservants will be granted citizenship. Liu Hui did not rebel, so the reward criteria should be the same as for Liu Xuanming who did rebel. Furthermore, the department reported that 'Rong Fei, Huimeng, and Liu Hui were privately involved, seducing each other, which led to Liu Hui getting angry and hitting people, injuring the pregnant woman. Although the law does not clearly stipulate, the crime should be punishable by death, and Zhang Zhishou and their families were sent to Dunhuang to serve as soldiers.' Your Majesty, you have shown mercy, not directly sentencing according to the memorial, even though they are spared the death penalty, I believe this approach is misguided. Laws and regulations, established by the founding emperor to govern the realm, should not be altered based on personal feelings or relationships."
According to the "Doulv," it is recorded: 'If grandparents or parents are angry and use weapons to kill their grandchildren, the punishment is five years' imprisonment, while killing them with intent results in an additional level of punishment.' Although a princess marrying down elevates her status above that of an ordinary wife, a pregnant woman is still a human being and should not be subjected to violence simply due to her status. In the fourth year of Yongping, the established rule from the previous dynasty was: 'All cases of exile and the death penalty must first judge the main offender before judging the accomplices.' Matters must be thoroughly investigated from the root, and it would be unacceptable to judge him as an accomplice simply because Liu Hui escaped. It has never been heard of to not judge the main offender. The punishments for exile and the death penalty are often inconsistent and inappropriate. Officials in the Ministry of Civil Affairs are tasked with submitting memorials. When Bing Ji was the prime minister, he did not investigate deaths caused by fights but did investigate when a cow breathed heavily; wasn't this a case of differential treatment? The offenses committed by Lady Rong and others amount to mere adultery. If they are apprehended and the evidence is conclusive, they will be punished according to the law, without exceeding the penalty. How can they be treated the same as palace criminals? Zhang Zhishou said that his sister married the army officer Luo Xianggui and has already borne him two daughters, becoming a mother of another family. "The Book of Rites" says that a woman cannot marry two husbands, just as she cannot serve two masters. If private behavior is not restrained, the fault lies with the husband, not the brothers. In the Wei and Jin dynasties, the punishment of exterminating five generations had not been abolished, and there exists a precedent for exempting sons from the responsibility of matricide. There has never been a debate about this, saying: 'Unmarried daughters should be punished by their parents; married women should be punished by their husbands.' This is an immutable rule, a principle upheld through the ages. The "Lü" says that 'relatives concealing each other' refers to all crimes. Moreover, how can such a disgraceful act as adultery be testified against by members of the same clan? Punishing them beyond their actual crimes contravenes the law. According to the "Lü," adultery does not carry joint liability. Liu Hui's anger should not result in punishment for his brother. Public punishment ensures transparency; rewarding someone in the court lets everyone know, this is the only way to maintain impartiality and avoid deceiving the public. How can irregular legal provisions be enforced nationwide? Once a punishment is wrongly administered, it cannot be reversed. Since there is an imperial decree, it should be executed, but this case does not adhere to legal standards and should be re-evaluated.
Not provided.
The Book of Documents says: "In the past, when Lady Ai broke the rules of propriety in the State of Lu, Duke Huan of Qi captured and executed her, and this incident was called out in the Spring and Autumn Annals. Additionally, when Lady Xia committed a serious error in the State of Chen, only Zheng Shu was punished, and her parents were not held responsible. This shows that a woman's mistakes aren't necessarily tied to her family. Moreover, for a married younger sister, can her sins implicate her brothers?"
The Right Minister You Zhao submitted a report saying: "We officials are responsible for handling state affairs, while the Ministry of Personnel is responsible for reviewing government orders; that's standard procedure. As for those criminals, that's up to the relevant departments, who are responsible for investigating and adjudicating. Once a case is closed, it’s not our concern. The offenses of Concubine Rong and the others deserve the death penalty, and getting the death penalty as per the law is enough. Holding her brother accountable for her crimes is way too harsh, according to the law. Furthermore, although Liu Hui escaped, his crimes shouldn't affect his family, but getting accomplices for treason definitely makes his crimes worse. This case breaks the law and needs to be sent back for a closer look by the right authorities."
The emperor said, "Liu Hui violated the law, disrupted the order, and is unforgivable! A reward is being offered for his capture; he must be caught! Consort Rong, Hui Meng, and Liu Hui engaged in incestuous relations, which has led to this incident; they are the main culprits. If they are not punished, how can we deter future wrongdoers? Furthermore, married daughters shouldn't drag their siblings into this mess. However, Zhi Shou and Qing He were aware of their sister's affair but chose not to intervene; instead, they lured Liu Hui into this scandalous behavior, damaging social morality; they deserve harsh punishment! I am specifically ordering the Ministry to handle this case outside the usual procedures; how can we apply the same standards here? Also, in ancient times there were separate prisons; should we still leave it to the Dali Temple? The Ministry of Personnel is in charge of tackling the core issues, and the Censorate is responsible for advising. If you fail to investigate the seriousness of this matter and do not carefully consider the impact on social morality, you will stray from the path of justice while merely clinging to the laws. You have betrayed the court's trust and bear grave responsibility! Cui Zuan is relieved of his duties as a court official, all the ministers of the Censorate are dismissed, and their salaries are temporarily suspended!"
After the Xiaochang era, chaos erupted across the land; laws and regulations were sometimes lenient and sometimes severe, with no consistency whatsoever. When Erzhu Rong seized power, his rule became even more arbitrary, and officials believed that being ruthless was a skill. After moving the capital to Ye City, bandits were rampant in the capital region. The relevant authorities proposed implementing strict laws: for bandits and murderers, both the main culprits and their accomplices must face execution, and their families must become low-status households; for those who didn't commit murder, if the stolen goods are worth less than five pieces of cloth, the main culprit is executed, the accomplices will be put to death, and their families will also become low-status households; petty thieves caught with more than ten pieces of cloth, the main culprit is executed, their families will be forced to work as laborers at relay stations, and the accomplices will be exiled.
The Minister Sun Teng submitted a memorial saying: "Upon careful consideration, if the law is consistent, it should not contradict itself; it should not be changed arbitrarily based on personal whims. The maximum penalty for public and private robbery is exile. However, the officials responsible for law enforcement are precisely violating the law, tending to stretch interpretations, adding many clauses beyond the law, and offering bounties for capturing thieves. As a result, the penal code becomes mere decoration, lawsuits increase, legal provisions multiply, and the number of thieves rises. This isn't how to govern effectively; it goes against ancient teachings! I believe that the key to a prosperous and peaceful era lies in lenient punishments; the decline of a nation is surely due to overly harsh laws. Thus, during the Han Dynasty, with its three simple laws, the world was united; while during the Qin Dynasty, with its harsh punishments, the country collapsed. Rituals and laws are meant to guide gentlemen, while strict laws are for the common people; if the crimes are clearly defined, the nation will have a stable legal system. Proverbs like 'in times of disaster, grant amnesty; those who persist in thievery shall face severe punishment' have long been written in the classics, and all dynasties have acted accordingly. Each situation has its own regulations based on the specific circumstances. Matters should not be made overly complicated, leaving ordinary people confused. I worry that stricter measures will only provoke more resistance from thieves. Anyone who commits theft should be punished according to the law, to clarify legal provisions. This way, punishments can be fair; we shouldn't lose sight of what's important." The emperor heeded his advice. After the Tianping years, due to the relocation of the capital and reconstruction, most officials did not adhere to laws and bribery became rampant. By the Xinghe years, King Wenxiang of Qi assisted in governance, rectifying the officialdom with fairness and justice, greatly changing this trend. By the Wuding years, the laws and regulations were strict, and everyone knew that the country was being governed well.
